Enola Gay Damaged at Air & Space Museum Opening

[Jay Honeck]

I'm surprised no one has brought up this travesty.

For those who don't know, the Enola Gay -- beautifully refurbished and now
on display at the new Udvar-Hazy facility of the National Air & Space
Museum -- was damaged by some nut case from Ohio who threw something at the
plane and dented it during a protest against the atomic bombing of Japan.

If it were up to me, a life sentence without hope of parole would be too
good for this jerk. To damage an irreplaceable aircraft, and a piece of
history, is absolutely unconscionable.

Margy, how bad is it?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, "Jay Honeck" > said:
>If it were up to me, a life sentence without hope of parole would be too
>good for this jerk. To damage an irreplaceable aircraft, and a piece of
>history, is absolutely unconscionable.

Don't be silly. They should drop him out of a plane over Hiroshima.


--
"The magic of usenet has never been its technology; and, only in part, its
reach. Its magic -- its power -- is based on the very real human connections
that form 'round its threads of conversation... the relationships that are
kindled, flamed and, on occasion, extinguished and mourned." -deCadmus

[Mike Rapoport]

Just make him pay for the damage.

Mike
MU-2


"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:GKjEb.593526$Fm2.545217@attbi_s04...
> I'm surprised no one has brought up this travesty.
>
> For those who don't know, the Enola Gay -- beautifully refurbished and now
> on display at the new Udvar-Hazy facility of the National Air & Space
> Museum -- was damaged by some nut case from Ohio who threw something at
the
> plane and dented it during a protest against the atomic bombing of Japan.
>
> If it were up to me, a life sentence without hope of parole would be too
> good for this jerk. To damage an irreplaceable aircraft, and a piece of
> history, is absolutely unconscionable.
>
> Margy, how bad is it?
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>

[plumb bob]

It's just a chunk of metal... that was used to kill much more than 3,000
innocent civilians - I believe we would call it state sponsored terrorism
these days. Why should we celebrate and adore a killing machine like that -
regardless of the circumstances? Just get it patched up and move on, really.
The history is far more important than the tool.

That should get things started around here :-)


"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:GKjEb.593526$Fm2.545217@attbi_s04...
> I'm surprised no one has brought up this travesty.
>
> For those who don't know, the Enola Gay -- beautifully refurbished and now
> on display at the new Udvar-Hazy facility of the National Air & Space
> Museum -- was damaged by some nut case from Ohio who threw something at
the
> plane and dented it during a protest against the atomic bombing of Japan.
>
> If it were up to me, a life sentence without hope of parole would be too
> good for this jerk. To damage an irreplaceable aircraft, and a piece of
> history, is absolutely unconscionable.
>
> Margy, how bad is it?
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>

[EDR]

In article >, Paul Tomblin
> wrote:

> In a previous article, "Jay Honeck" > said:
> >If it were up to me, a life sentence without hope of parole would be too
> >good for this jerk. To damage an irreplaceable aircraft, and a piece of
> >history, is absolutely unconscionable.
>
> Don't be silly. They should drop him out of a plane over Hiroshima.

Like Slim Pickins?

[EDR]

> > In a previous article, "Jay Honeck" > said:
> > >If it were up to me, a life sentence without hope of parole would be too
> > >good for this jerk. To damage an irreplaceable aircraft, and a piece of
> > >history, is absolutely unconscionable.

------------------------------------------------------
From this mornings COLUMBUS DISPATCH...

A PLACE IN ANNALS OF WAR
Restored Enola Gay returns pilot to public eye
Thursday, December 18, 2003
Mike Harden
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH


CHUCK KENNEDY | KNIGHT RIDDER / TRIBUNE
The retired brigadier general in front of the restored Enola Gay B-29
at the Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center of the National Air and Space Museum
in Chantilly, Va., outside Washington
FRED SQUILLANTE | DISPATCH
Paul W. Tibbets Jr., 88, during an interview at Lane Aviation in
Columbus

The last hurrah of the man who dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima,
Japan, arrived a week with none of the acrimony that has sometimes
accompanied his notoriety.

ŒŒI¹ve had all the attention I need in this life," retired Brig. Gen.
Paul W. Tibbets Jr. said Sunday as he dawdled over pancakes at the Bob
Evans on E. Main Street. ŒŒI¹d just as soon the phone never ring
again."

Ever since Aug. 6, 1945, he has shunned the spotlight.

The only order of business compelling enough to entice Tibbets to leave
his Columbus home to court media coverage was the restoration of the
Enola Gay, his old B-29 bomber. ŒŒShe was shining like a silver
dollar," said Tibbets, 88. The enhancement was 40 years in the works.

ŒŒI wanted to climb in it and fly."

A week ago today, Tibbets saw the new wing of the Smithsonian¹s
National Air and Space Museum at the Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center in
Chantilly, Va.

His visit preceded the public opening Monday, when a Columbus resident
was arrested for hurling a red liquid at the plane to protest its
display.

The freshly burnished B-29 that Tibbets beheld during his sneak preview
is a far cry from the Enola Gay he ruefully witnessed going to ruin at
Andrews Air Force Base more than four decades ago.

ŒŒI had flown her to Chicago in 1948 when she was given to the
Smithsonian," Tibbets recalled. "From there, she went to a place in
Texas called Rattlesnake Gulch."

By the time the bomber was flown to Andrews and stored in a remote
niche of the base near the nation¹s capital, "The windows had been
knocked out," Tibbets said.

"There were bird nests in it. Some of the instruments had been stripped
out by souvenir hunters."

The Enola Gay was dismantled in 1960. The Smithsonian stored various
parts in four Maryland warehouses.

"The people at the Smithsonian were trying to hide the . . . thing,"
Tibbets said.

When the museum brought a portion of the fuselage out of mothballs in
1993, bitter controversy erupted over exhibit text and display items.
Several veterans groups protested what they believed was a handwringing
apology for the Enola Gay¹s mission.

"It was a disservice to the country," Tibbets said. "It suggested that
the Japanese were fighting to defend their heritage and their culture
and that we were fighting a war of vengeance and aggression. It was all
a bunch of crap, insulting to anyone who had worn a uniform."

The wording was changed, and the exhibit of the partial fuselage was
popular.

"The Enola Gay had almost 4 million visitors," Tibbets said. "The Star
Wars exhibit only got a million. That tells me there was a consensus on
the part of the public. They liked that airplane and appreciated what
it did."

This time around, the Smithsonian has assiduously avoided any exhibit
copy that could stir smoldering feelings. The Enola Gay display doesn¹t
mention the number of atomic-bomb casualties.

But a mention of the toll wouldn¹t have troubled Tibbets.

"Why be bashful or backward?" he asked. "That¹s what it took to end the
war.

"What we had to do was convince the Japanese of the futility of
continuing the fight. Clausewitz said you must use everything at your
disposal to impose your will upon the enemy.

"The Japanese people understand that concept far better than the
American public ever will," Tibbets said he was once told by Mitsuo
Fuchida, lead pilot of the Japanese raid on Pearl Harbor.

Fuchida, Tibbets said, told him he would have been honored to have been
handed the assignment to drop an A-bomb on a U.S. city during the war.

"You sure surprised us," Tibbets allowed when he first met Fuchida in
1952.

"You didn¹t do such a bad job yourself," the former Japanese pilot
replied.

Tibbets visited Nagasaki a month after a pilot under his command
dropped the second atomic bomb there.

Although the second drop was somewhat off-target, Tibbets grasped the
staggering power of the new weapon and its potential to change warfare
forever.

He remained in the Air Force for more than 20 years after World War II.

Tibbets endured a spate of urban legends, fed by inaccuracies in news
accounts and books, that suggested he had either committed suicide,
been institutionalized or imprisoned.

"They said I was crazy," he groused, "said I was a drunkard, in and out
of institutions. At the time, I was running the National Crisis Center
at the Pentagon."

The culprit, apparently, was the late Claude Eatherly, who flew the
weather plane over Hiroshima on the day of the mission. After the war,
he experienced emotional problems that led him to try to hold up a
Texas post office with a water pistol.

Nevertheless, Eatherly convinced German philosopher and writer Gunther
Anders that he, not Tibbets, led the mission. Anders¹ book Burning
Conscience, published in 1962, became an endless source of chagrin for
Tibbets.

For years after military service, Tibbets quietly operated Executive
Jet Aviation at Port Columbus. He reared three sons ‹ none of whom
chose careers in the military. He lives in relative anonymity with his
second wife, Andrea, in suburban Columbus. He has indulged the press,
though never curried its attention.

He tired of the Eatherly debacle and wearied of successive waves of
journalists who thought they were the first to ask whether he regretted
dropping the bomb.

"Hell, no," he has said. "I¹ve always believed I was on a mission not
to kill but to save lives. And I sure didn¹t do it singlehandedly. It
took a lot of people to put me over that target."

But that was a long time ago.

"The guys who appreciated that I saved their asses are mostly dead
now," Tibbets said.

"I didn¹t go out there just to save them. I went out to stop the
killing all over. When I was handed the assignment, I was told to form
a unit that could drop these two new bombs simultaneously on Germany
and Japan.

"Germany gave up before it could be dropped."

Tibbets has been asked dozens of times why he was chosen.

"Why would a young lieutenant colonel be picked to do the job?" he
mused. "I don¹t know. I didn¹t ask."

He was 30 when he flew the Hiroshima mission.

"That is one of the most astonishing things about his career," said
Tibbets¹ namesake grandson, Air Force Maj. Paul Tibbets IV, a B-2
mission command pilot.

"He had such a tremendous amount of responsibility at such a young age.
I can¹t fathom having that kind of responsibility at such a young age.

"He was born with the gift to lead. I don¹t think I have that gift."

Naturally, his grandfather disagrees.

Young Paul will do what he has to do.

Mike Harden is a Dispatch columnist.

[Mutts]

No I think that will about finish it.
If thats what you think your too far gone.
Do any of you jokers ever watch the History Channel even?
Im tired of suffering fools. Thank god your such a tiny minority.


On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 15:57:34 GMT, "plumb bob" >
wrote:

>It's just a chunk of metal... that was used to kill much more than 3,000
>innocent civilians - I believe we would call it state sponsored terrorism
>these days. Why should we celebrate and adore a killing machine like that -
>regardless of the circumstances? Just get it patched up and move on, really.
>The history is far more important than the tool.
>
>That should get things started around here :-)
>

[Jay Honeck]

> It's just a chunk of metal... that was used to kill much more than 3,000
> innocent civilians - I believe we would call it state sponsored terrorism
> these days.

That's sick.

Paul Tibbets and his crew saved over a million lives with that plane.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Dylan Smith]

In article <N7kEb.423166$ao4.1358042@attbi_s51>, plumb bob wrote:
> It's just a chunk of metal... that was used to kill much more than 3,000
> innocent civilians - I believe we would call it state sponsored terrorism
> these days.

Thinking selfishly, it's a chunk of metal that probably saved my life.
Or allowed me to exist in the first place.

My dad's father was shortly to be sent to the Pacific in the Royal Navy
had the war not ended (Britain would have gone to help out in the
Pacific theatre had Japan not surrendered). It is very likely my
mother's father would have ended up out there too - he was an engineer
in the Royal Air Force. If they had gone out there, there chances of
surviving the war - and thousands of other British and American
servicemen - would have been dramatically reduced.

It wouldn't be called state-sponsored terrorism these days - it was and
is an act of war. The Japanese started the Pacific war by attacking the
United States. Destroying Japan's infrastructure and will to fight was a
perfectly valid method of stopping Japan - and history shows that it had
the intended effect. Were the B-17 bomber crews in Europe state
sponsored terrorists? Would they be if the same happened now? No. They
were servicemen fighting a war and would still be considered so today.

How many Japanese civilians would have died had the war continued into a
land invasion of Japan? We can never know for sure, but it's not
unreasonable to assume that the number would be larger.

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, "Jay Honeck" > said:
>Paul Tibbets and his crew saved over a million lives with that plane.

I think you mean "saved over a million allied lives". If you count the
number of Japanese who would have died in the invasion, you could probably
multiply that number by 20.


--
"The magic of usenet has never been its technology; and, only in part, its
reach. Its magic -- its power -- is based on the very real human connections
that form 'round its threads of conversation... the relationships that are
kindled, flamed and, on occasion, extinguished and mourned." -deCadmus

[Rob Perkins]

On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 15:30:46 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> wrote:

>the Enola Gay -- beautifully refurbished and now
>on display at the new Udvar-Hazy facility of the National Air & Space
>Museum -- was damaged by some nut case from Ohio who threw something at the
>plane and dented it during a protest against the atomic bombing of Japan.

He was protesting something that happened three generations ago?

Aren't protests usually more effective if they're done *before* an
event takes place?

Rob

[Andrew Boyd]

"plumb bob" blathered:

> ... state sponsored terrorism ...

Sir: were you simply born an idiot, or is your sad
condition a tragic result of years of exposure to
nonsensical socialist propaganda?

--
ATP www.pittspecials.com/images/da2.jpg

[Maule Driver]

"plumb bob" > wrote in message
news:N7kEb.423166$ao4.1358042@attbi_s51...
> It's just a chunk of metal (snippety snip)
> Just get it patched up and move on, really.
> The history is far more important than the tool.
>
I agree. We wear out historical artifacts by both loving and hating them
too much. Museums patch them up and keep them out there. Like publicity
for media stars, maybe there's no such thing as a bad visitor to a museum.
As in "Mommy, why was that man so upset and why did he put a dent in the
airplane?" "Because a lot of people died in WWII, would you like to read
about it?"

Reading about the event is more rewarding. "Enola Gay" by Thomas and Witts
(1977) was OK with lot's of flying as I recall. "Fly Boys" by Bradley is a
good contemporary account of many aspects of the Pacific conflict including
the bomb, Japanese culture, and the fire bombing of Japanese cities.

I had a chance to tour the a/c while it was being restored. Sticking my
head up thru the bomb bay doors made it unforgettable. Of course 'touring'
is a misnomer. It's much smaller and tighter inside than I would have ever
imagined.

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, (Andrew Boyd) said:
>"plumb bob" blathered:
>
>> ... state sponsored terrorism ...
>
>Sir: were you simply born an idiot, or is your sad
>condition a tragic result of years of exposure to
>nonsensical socialist propaganda?

Wait a second - I'm probably more leftist than 90% of the people who post
here, and I think the bombing of Hiroshima was a necessary evil that saved
millions of Japanese lives. (I also think that not doing the whole
Nuremburg trials thing on Japan has let them pretend they weren't as evil
as they were and left them totally unrepentant, so I've probably just
given up most of my leftist credentials.)


--
"The magic of usenet has never been its technology; and, only in part, its
reach. Its magic -- its power -- is based on the very real human connections
that form 'round its threads of conversation... the relationships that are
kindled, flamed and, on occasion, extinguished and mourned." -deCadmus

[Montblack]

("Mike Rapoport" wrote)
> Just make him pay for the damage.


I'm going more with A Clockwork Orange type "teachable moment" here.

Open his eyes, so to speak, to over 10 years of brutal Japanese military
aggression. At times, the Japanese made the Nazis look like Boy Scouts.

That nonsense needed to stop. After the bomb(s) were dropped - it stopped.

Much like the (1971) movie, I don't see plan A working out so well. So yes,
I support your plan B - just make him pay for the damage.

--
Montblack
http://lumma.de/mt/archives/bart.gif

[Roger Tracy]

Publish his name and address. Then let the chips fall ....



"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:GKjEb.593526$Fm2.545217@attbi_s04...
> I'm surprised no one has brought up this travesty.
>
> For those who don't know, the Enola Gay -- beautifully refurbished and now
> on display at the new Udvar-Hazy facility of the National Air & Space
> Museum -- was damaged by some nut case from Ohio who threw something at
the
> plane and dented it during a protest against the atomic bombing of Japan.
>
> If it were up to me, a life sentence without hope of parole would be too
> good for this jerk. To damage an irreplaceable aircraft, and a piece of
> history, is absolutely unconscionable.
>
> Margy, how bad is it?
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>

[Cub Driver]

>If it were up to me, a life sentence without hope of parole would be too
>good for this jerk. To damage an irreplaceable aircraft, and a piece of
>history, is absolutely unconscionable.

Not to mention the risk of killing someone with a glass bottle thrown
from an overhead walkway.

(There was no paint on the B-29, but it was dinged.)

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

[Cub Driver]

>It's just a chunk of metal... that was used to kill much more than 3,000
>innocent civilians - I believe we would call it state sponsored terrorism
>these days. Why should we celebrate and adore a killing machine like that -
>regardless of the circumstances?

Your logic would close a lot of museums! Indeed, I doubt that NASM
itself would be open today if it didn't celebrate killing machines of
all nations.

(3,000 people, huh? You're more than a little bit off. nOr are you
saying that only 3,000 of the Hiroshima dead were innocent? See
www.warbirdforum.com/hirodead.htm )


all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

[John T]

"Cub Driver" > wrote in message

>
> (3,000 people, huh? You're more than a little bit off. nOr are you
> saying that only 3,000 of the Hiroshima dead were innocent? See
> www.warbirdforum.com/hirodead.htm )

No, he's linking the WTC atrocity (~3,000 dead) with Hiroshima.

Personally, I think you guys are just feeding a troll.

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/tknoFlyer
__________

[John T]

"Roger Tracy" > wrote in message

>
> Publish his name and address. Then let the chips fall ....

I'm not certain it would have been chips falling had I seen him do it.

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/tknoFlyer
__________

[David Brooks]

"Rob Perkins" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 15:30:46 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> > wrote:
>
> >the Enola Gay -- beautifully refurbished and now
> >on display at the new Udvar-Hazy facility of the National Air & Space
> >Museum -- was damaged by some nut case from Ohio who threw something at
the
> >plane and dented it during a protest against the atomic bombing of Japan.
>
> He was protesting something that happened three generations ago?
>
> Aren't protests usually more effective if they're done *before* an
> event takes place?

Didn't have any effect here last winter.

-- David Brooks

[Dennis O'Connor]

Monty, there have been times where I read or watch the news where some
handwringing revisionist is wailing about how bad the USA was/is against the
helpless, peaceable, japanese and I have that great longing for a time
travel machine so that I could simply pop them back to a japanese pow camp
on Batann the day before the death march began... Seems fair to me...

Denny
"Montblack" > wrote in message
...
> ("Mike Rapoport" wrote)
> > Just make him pay for the damage.
>
>
> I'm going more with A Clockwork Orange type "teachable moment" here.
>
> Open his eyes, so to speak, to over 10 years of brutal Japanese military
> aggression. At times, the Japanese made the Nazis look like Boy Scouts.
>
> That nonsense needed to stop. After the bomb(s) were dropped - it stopped.
>
> Much like the (1971) movie, I don't see plan A working out so well. So
yes,
> I support your plan B - just make him pay for the damage.
>
> --
> Montblack
> http://lumma.de/mt/archives/bart.gif
>
>

[Corrie]

A *unique* hunk o tin it is, however. The 'tool' IS the history. ONE
airplane was able to do that amount of damage - unprecendented. The
B-29 itself was the most technologically advanced machine of its day.

To repeat what should not require repeating: 1. War sucks. If you
have to do it, make it hard and fast, and get it over with. 2. Fewer
civilians died at Hiroshima than in the fire-bombing of Tokyo or
Dresden, or in the Japanese depredations in China. 3. The use of the
Bomb saved millions of Japanese and American lives that would have
been needlessly lost had the US been forced to invade.

It's a shame that NASM doesn't have a B-36 - an airplane based on the
same technology, but so big that it makes a B-29 look like a kid's tin
toy. The "Peacemaker" never dropped a bomb in anger - it scared the
Soviets out of starting anything stupid in the dark days of the early
Cold War. I'm looking forward to finally getting out to Wright-Pat
and seeing the one they have there.


"plumb bob" > wrote in message news:<N7kEb.423166$ao4.1358042@attbi_s51>...
> It's just a chunk of metal... that was used to kill much more than 3,000
> innocent civilians - I believe we would call it state sponsored terrorism
> these days. Why should we celebrate and adore a killing machine like that -
> regardless of the circumstances? Just get it patched up and move on, really.
> The history is far more important than the tool.
>
> That should get things started around here :-)
>
>
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> news:GKjEb.593526$Fm2.545217@attbi_s04...
> > I'm surprised no one has brought up this travesty.
> >
> > For those who don't know, the Enola Gay -- beautifully refurbished and now
> > on display at the new Udvar-Hazy facility of the National Air & Space
> > Museum -- was damaged by some nut case from Ohio who threw something at
> the
> > plane and dented it during a protest against the atomic bombing of Japan.
> >
> > If it were up to me, a life sentence without hope of parole would be too
> > good for this jerk. To damage an irreplaceable aircraft, and a piece of
> > history, is absolutely unconscionable.
> >
> > Margy, how bad is it?
> > --
> > Jay Honeck
> > Iowa City, IA
> > Pathfinder N56993
> > www.AlexisParkInn.com
> > "Your Aviation Destination"
> >
> >

[Andy News]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message news:<GKjEb.593526$Fm2.545217@attbi_s04>...
> I'm surprised no one has brought up this travesty.
>
> For those who don't know, the Enola Gay -- beautifully refurbished and now
> on display at the new Udvar-Hazy facility of the National Air & Space
> Museum -- was damaged by some nut case from Ohio who threw something at the
> plane and dented it during a protest against the atomic bombing of Japan.
>
> If it were up to me, a life sentence without hope of parole would be too
> good for this jerk. To damage an irreplaceable aircraft, and a piece of
> history, is absolutely unconscionable.
>
> Margy, how bad is it?


Would you react the same way if a refurbished Boeing 767 and a model
of the world trade center was on display at the Afghan museum of
history? Although the Hiroshima bombing was necessary to end the war,
it is not something we should be proud of and display at a national
museum.

[Dave Stadt]

"Andy News" > wrote in message
om...
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:<GKjEb.593526$Fm2.545217@attbi_s04>...
> > I'm surprised no one has brought up this travesty.
> >
> > For those who don't know, the Enola Gay -- beautifully refurbished and
now
> > on display at the new Udvar-Hazy facility of the National Air & Space
> > Museum -- was damaged by some nut case from Ohio who threw something at
the
> > plane and dented it during a protest against the atomic bombing of
Japan.
> >
> > If it were up to me, a life sentence without hope of parole would be too
> > good for this jerk. To damage an irreplaceable aircraft, and a piece of
> > history, is absolutely unconscionable.
> >
> > Margy, how bad is it?
>
>
> Would you react the same way if a refurbished Boeing 767 and a model
> of the world trade center was on display at the Afghan museum of
> history? Although the Hiroshima bombing was necessary to end the war,
> it is not something we should be proud of and display at a national
> museum.

Except that we are proud of it and what it did to end the war. Why should
we not be proud of it? The Japs started the war and when we developed the
technology to end it we did. It is a part of our proud history. If someone
doesn't like the display the simple solution is............don't go to the
museum.

[Kevin McCue]

And why not? Plenty of Japanese go visit the USS Arizona.

--
Kevin McCue
KRYN
'47 Luscombe 8E
Rans S-17 (for sale)




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

[Bob Noel]

In article >, Dylan Smith
> wrote:

> Thinking selfishly, it's a chunk of metal that probably saved my life.
> Or allowed me to exist in the first place.

It probably saved my father's life as well (and several uncles).

--
Bob Noel

[plumb bob]

"John T" > wrote in message
ws.com...
> "Cub Driver" > wrote in message
>
> >
> > (3,000 people, huh? You're more than a little bit off. nOr are you
> > saying that only 3,000 of the Hiroshima dead were innocent? See
> > www.warbirdforum.com/hirodead.htm )
>
> No, he's linking the WTC atrocity (~3,000 dead) with Hiroshima.
>
> Personally, I think you guys are just feeding a troll.

You win the prize... I am trolling. For those with a keen eye it should have
been obvious. BTW, I think the bombing of Hiroshima was absolutely necessary
to end the war, even though innocent civilians were killed. Not to mention
the carpet bombing of civilian cities in Europe (Dresden was pretty bad) to
weaken the resolve of the bad guys.

For the rest of you, get off your moral high horses. War is a dirty
business. Think about that for a change. Think about the millions of
soldiers who fought and won that war, and then go visit D.C. to find their
memorials. It is very disappointing that that generation is not properly
honored and remembered in my opinion. And you want to get upset that someone
dented the Enola Gay???

-- Plumb Bob (straight up, hold the politically correct speech)

[Montblack]

("Andy News" wrote)
> Would you react the same way if a refurbished Boeing 767 and a model
> of the world trade center was on display at the Afghan museum of
> history? Although the Hiroshima bombing was necessary to end the war,
> it is not something we should be proud of and display at a national
> museum.


If those models(?) were at an Afghan museum, that would be fine by me.

I'd like to see the exhibit room set up as a 25 year timeline. The beginning
part of the timeline would start as a wide line on the floor, then it would
go up the wall, cuts across the corner of the ceiling, then comes back down
a different wall, and back onto the floor - stopping (painted like an giant
arrow) in front of a door marked, "Tomorrow in Afghanistan." Something fun
like that for the kids. :-)

If museums should only display things of national pride, where do we put the
Civil Rights exhibit from the Birmingham Alabama museum? How about American
Indian
artifacts and history? I say we leave out all references to Indians from
about ...maybe ...1825 on.

The Enola Gay is history. Sputnik is history. Lindbergh's plane is history.
A Jap Zero is history, An Me-262 is history.

--
Montblack
http://lumma.de/mt/archives/bart.gif

[G.R. Patterson III]

Dylan Smith wrote:
>
> My dad's father was shortly to be sent to the Pacific in the Royal Navy
> had the war not ended (Britain would have gone to help out in the
> Pacific theatre had Japan not surrendered).

My father's division was being readied for transport to the Pacific for the
invasion when the atomic bombs were dropped. I also would probably not have been
born if we had had to invade.

George Patterson
Great discoveries are not announced with "Eureka!". What's usually said is
"Hummmmm... That's interesting...."

[G.R. Patterson III]

Maule Driver wrote:
>
> I agree. We wear out historical artifacts by both loving and hating them
> too much. Museums patch them up and keep them out there. Like publicity
> for media stars, maybe there's no such thing as a bad visitor to a museum.
> As in "Mommy, why was that man so upset and why did he put a dent in the
> airplane?" "Because a lot of people died in WWII, would you like to read
> about it?"

Or maybe the true answer is "because he's a nutcase, just like the guy that tried
to shatter the Pieta".

George Patterson
Great discoveries are not announced with "Eureka!". What's usually said is
"Hummmmm... That's interesting...."

[G.R. Patterson III]

Corrie wrote:
>
> Fewer civilians died at Hiroshima than in the fire-bombing of Tokyo or
> Dresden, or in the Japanese depredations in China.

Fewer people, civilian or not, were killed at Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined
than were killed with samurai swords by the Japanese during WW II.

George Patterson
Great discoveries are not announced with "Eureka!". What's usually said is
"Hummmmm... That's interesting...."

[StellaStar]

> maybe there's no such thing as a bad visitor to a museum.
>As in "Mommy, why was that man so upset and why did he put a dent in the
>airplane?" "Because a lot of people died in WWII, would you like to read
>about it?"

Hear hear! Everything is a teachable moment, and is best handled by explaining
that people differ, and some overreact by expressing themselves in
inappropriate ways. I often go look something up so I can explain it to my
kids, or someone else, and wind up greatly extending my own education on the
topic. And learning about the reasons people disagree with my point of view is
also very educational.

[David Dyer-Bennet]

Bob Noel > writes:

> In article >, Dylan Smith
> > wrote:
>
>> Thinking selfishly, it's a chunk of metal that probably saved my life.
>> Or allowed me to exist in the first place.
>
> It probably saved my father's life as well (and several uncles).

And quite possibly my father's, as well. He had arranged to transfer
to a unit that wasn't being demobilized after Germany surrendered,
because he didn't feel it was right to get out while war was still
going on. He could easily have ended up in the Pacific then.

I have somewhat ambiguous feelings about being a citizen of the only
country to ever use nuclear weapons on human beings. But no
particularly ambiguous feelings about the war against Japan. I'm
against war, but if somebody throws a war, I prefer winning to losing.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, >, <www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
RKBA: <noguns-nomoney.com> <www.dd-b.net/carry/>
Photos: <dd-b.lighthunters.net> Snapshots: <www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/>
Dragaera/Steven Brust: <dragaera.info/>

[Cub Driver]

>Everything is a teachable moment, and is best handled by explaining
>that people differ

Tell that to the Central Park Jogger!

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

[Cub Driver]

>> Aren't protests usually more effective if they're done *before* an
>> event takes place?
>
>Didn't have any effect here last winter.

I think he wanted the protestor to take his argument to Harry Truman
in 1945.

(He was just barely old enough. As I recall the first news story, the
bottle thrower was 73.)


all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

[Cub Driver]

>The Enola Gay is history. Sputnik is history. Lindbergh's plane is history.
>A Jap Zero is history, An Me-262 is history.

And the Japanese (we aren't supposed to say Jap any more) Zero is
indeed on display at NASM, downtown if not at Udvar-Hazy.

Indeed, enemy aircraft have always been strong draws at aviation
museums, and not just in this country.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

[Bob Noel]

In article >, Cub Driver
> wrote:

> >Everything is a teachable moment, and is best handled by explaining
> >that people differ
>
> Tell that to the Central Park Jogger!

the explanation just needs to take different forms...

--
Bob Noel

[Mike Beede]

In article >, StellaStar > wrote:

> > maybe there's no such thing as a bad visitor to a museum.
> >As in "Mommy, why was that man so upset and why did he put a dent in the
> >airplane?" "Because a lot of people died in WWII, would you like to read
> >about it?"
>
> Hear hear! Everything is a teachable moment, and is best handled by explaining
> that people differ, and some overreact by expressing themselves in
> inappropriate ways. I often go look something up so I can explain it to my
> kids, or someone else, and wind up greatly extending my own education on the
> topic. And learning about the reasons people disagree with my point of view is
> also very educational.

I was wondering why I was bothering to read this thread. Now I know
why. I couldn't agree more, though I didn't know that's what I thought
till I heard it....

Mike Beede

[Maule Driver]

"Corrie" > wrote in message
m...
> A *unique* hunk o tin it is, however. The 'tool' IS the history. ONE
> airplane was able to do that amount of damage - unprecendented. The
> B-29 itself was the most technologically advanced machine of its day.
>
I love aircraft too but would submit that the bomb IS the history. Of
course it was more than vaporized - quite a restoration project even for the
pros at the Smithsonian.

[Tom Sixkiller]

"plumb bob" > wrote in message
news:1hrEb.597205$Fm2.545591@attbi_s04...
> "John T" > wrote in message
> ws.com...
> > "Cub Driver" > wrote in message
> >
> > >
> > > (3,000 people, huh? You're more than a little bit off. nOr are you
> > > saying that only 3,000 of the Hiroshima dead were innocent? See
> > > www.warbirdforum.com/hirodead.htm )
> >
> > No, he's linking the WTC atrocity (~3,000 dead) with Hiroshima.
> >
> > Personally, I think you guys are just feeding a troll.
>
> You win the prize... I am trolling. For those with a keen eye it should
have
> been obvious. BTW, I think the bombing of Hiroshima was absolutely
necessary
> to end the war, even though innocent civilians were killed.


There ARE NOT INNOCENT CIVILIANS in a nation that started an agressive war.
The blood of those that were NOT RESPONSIBLE for the war is on the hands of
those who WERE RESPONSIBLE.

> Not to mention
> the carpet bombing of civilian cities in Europe (Dresden was pretty bad)
to
> weaken the resolve of the bad guys.

And knock out a bunch of German manufacturing that Germany put there BECAUSE
they figured the Allies would not bomb Dresden.

> For the rest of you, get off your moral high horses. War is a dirty
> business. Think about that for a change. Think about the millions of
> soldiers who fought and won that war, and then go visit D.C. to find their
> memorials. It is very disappointing that that generation is not properly
> honored and remembered in my opinion. And you want to get upset that
someone
> dented the Enola Gay???

Good up to the last line, then you use a rationalization that most parents
wouldn't accept from a four year old.

[C J Campbell]

"Andy News" > wrote in message
om...
| "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:<GKjEb.593526$Fm2.545217@attbi_s04>...
| > I'm surprised no one has brought up this travesty.
| >
| > For those who don't know, the Enola Gay -- beautifully refurbished and
now
| > on display at the new Udvar-Hazy facility of the National Air & Space
| > Museum -- was damaged by some nut case from Ohio who threw something at
the
| > plane and dented it during a protest against the atomic bombing of
Japan.
| >
| > If it were up to me, a life sentence without hope of parole would be too
| > good for this jerk. To damage an irreplaceable aircraft, and a piece of
| > history, is absolutely unconscionable.
| >
| > Margy, how bad is it?
|
|
| Would you react the same way if a refurbished Boeing 767 and a model
| of the world trade center was on display at the Afghan museum of
| history? Although the Hiroshima bombing was necessary to end the war,
| it is not something we should be proud of and display at a national
| museum.

Ah, yes. The old 'moral equivalence' argument. Dropping an atomic bomb on
Hiroshima to end more than ten years of the most horrible war in history is
somehow morally equivalent to the world trade center attack.

Makes about as much sense as the PETA argument that eating a chicken is
morally the same as killing a human.

You are an idiot.

[Verbs Under My Gel]

Mutts > wrote in message >...
> No I think that will about finish it.
> If thats what you think your too far gone.
> Do any of you jokers ever watch the History Channel even?
> Im tired of suffering fools. Thank god your such a tiny minority.
>
>

Hello Pot, Kettle here. It's "you're", a contraction of "you" and "are".

[Maule Driver]

"G.R. Patterson III" >
> > I love aircraft too but would submit that the bomb IS the history. Of
> > course it was more than vaporized - quite a restoration project even for
the
> > pros at the Smithsonian.
>
> They've got one of the "fat boy" bombs at the museum at Oshkosh. They
claim there's
> nothing inside the casing, of course.

Having seen some of the restoration practices they follow I wouldn't be
surprised if they loaded the 'fat boy' full of nuclear material, then
emptied it before putting it on display.

Those folks are nuts in a good way.

[G.R. Patterson III]

Maule Driver wrote:
>
> I love aircraft too but would submit that the bomb IS the history. Of
> course it was more than vaporized - quite a restoration project even for the
> pros at the Smithsonian.

They've got one of the "fat boy" bombs at the museum at Oshkosh. They claim there's
nothing inside the casing, of course.

George Patterson
Great discoveries are not announced with "Eureka!". What's usually said is
"Hummmmm... That's interesting...."

[David Brooks]

"Cub Driver" > wrote in message
...
>
> >> Aren't protests usually more effective if they're done *before* an
> >> event takes place?
> >
> >Didn't have any effect here last winter.
>
> I think he wanted the protestor to take his argument to Harry Truman
> in 1945.

I was referring to the protests that preceded the Iraq invasion.

-- David Brooks

[plumb bob]

"Tom Sixkiller" > wrote in message
...
> "plumb bob" > wrote in message
> > For the rest of you, get off your moral high horses. War is a dirty
> > business. Think about that for a change. Think about the millions of
> > soldiers who fought and won that war, and then go visit D.C. to find
their
> > memorials. It is very disappointing that that generation is not properly
> > honored and remembered in my opinion. And you want to get upset that
> > someone dented the Enola Gay???
>
> Good up to the last line, then you use a rationalization that most parents
> wouldn't accept from a four year old.

Tell me how a dent in a heap of metal has any significance compared to what
happened to millions of people in the war. Then, you might have a case. Go
back and read the original post - the person who wrote the original post
behaved as if the sky was falling. These are just objects connected to
events of historical significance. The essence of the story is in the lives
of the people that lived and died in it, so we can enjoy the freedoms we
have today. All else is not very important in my opinion. Again, I find it
very disappointing that this generation is not better remembered. The FIRST
such national memorial will open on May 29, 2004 in Washington, D.C.... 59
years later.

www.wwiimemorial.com

Plumb Bob, straight up opinions.

[Newps]

plumb bob wrote:
Again, I find it
> very disappointing that this generation is not better remembered.

You've got to be kidding. The WWII generation is the most remembered in
history. At any given time I can find a program on TV relating to WWII.
There have been more books written about WWII than any other. There
are numerous monuments relating to WWII in many places. Pearl Harbor
and the flag raising on Iwo Jima sculpture come to mind. Just because
there isn't a monument labelled for all WWII participants is a silly
argument. Besides it has been my experience that the harder it is to
get your monument erected in DC the more appreciated it is.

[Ron Natalie]

"plumb bob" > wrote in message
news:TfIEb.88748$8y1.292185@attbi_s52...

> have today. All else is not very important in my opinion. Again, I find it
> very disappointing that this generation is not better remembered. The
FIRST
> such national memorial will open on May 29, 2004 in Washington, D.C.... 59
> years later.
>
Too bad is it's going to be the most egregious visual eye-sore perpetrated
on the national mall since WWII.

[Dan Luke]

"Corrie" wrote:
> The "Peacemaker" never dropped a bomb in anger - it scared the
> Soviets out of starting anything stupid in the dark days of the early
> Cold War.

It would surprise me to learn that the Soviets were terrified of a
weapon based on the thoroughly discredited idea that heavily armed,
unescorted strategic bombers could fight their way deep into enemy
territory with acceptable losses. The B-36 always struck me as a flying
porkbarrel project propelled by Curtis LeMay's ego.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

[John T]

"plumb bob" > wrote in message
news:TfIEb.88748$8y1.292185@attbi_s52
>
> Tell me how a dent in a heap of metal has any significance compared
> to what happened to millions of people in the war.

That's not the point. You tell me why it's acceptable to vandalize an
historical artifact (of any type).

> These are just objects connected to events of historical significance.

They deserve careful respect because of that connection - regardless of the
politics involved either then or now.

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/tknoFlyer
__________

[Newps]

That's exactly what the Soviets were afraid of. We spent them into
collapse because they thought our weapons might work. The B1 Bomber,
Star Wars, etc. They were fairly certain these things wouldn't work as
advertised, but they couldn't afford to take the chance that they might.
Unfortunately for them they also couldn't afford to keep up.

Dan Luke wrote:

> "Corrie" wrote:
>
>>The "Peacemaker" never dropped a bomb in anger - it scared the
>>Soviets out of starting anything stupid in the dark days of the early
>>Cold War.
>
>
> It would surprise me to learn that the Soviets were terrified of a
> weapon based on the thoroughly discredited idea that heavily armed,
> unescorted strategic bombers could fight their way deep into enemy
> territory with acceptable losses. The B-36 always struck me as a flying
> porkbarrel project propelled by Curtis LeMay's ego.

[Jay Honeck]

> Too bad is it's going to be the most egregious visual eye-sore perpetrated
> on the national mall since WWII.

That's EXACTLY what everyone said about the Viet Nam Veteran's Memorial,
before it opened.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Cub Driver]

>I love aircraft too but would submit that the bomb IS the history. Of
>course it was more than vaporized - quite a restoration project even for the
>pros at the Smithsonian.

I believe there are at least two replicas, and I have seen one of
them, at Wright-Patt air force museum. The other I think is in New
Mexico.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

[Cub Driver]

>It would surprise me to learn that the Soviets were terrified of a
>weapon based on the thoroughly discredited idea that heavily armed,
>unescorted strategic bombers could fight their way deep into enemy
>territory with acceptable losses. The B-36 always struck me as a flying
>porkbarrel project propelled by Curtis LeMay's ego.

We know for a certainty that the 36s routinely flew over China and
even Vladivostok, and very likely they flew over much of Siberia and
perhaps even eastern Russia. Several crewmen have related how they
watched the MiGs trying to get up to their altitude but vainly falling
away. Such flights were probably made in excess of 50,000 feet.

LeMay actually didn't care for the 36, but it was in the pipeline when
he became head of SAC. He accepted it for what it was: a placemarker
for the B-52. It overlapped the B-47 (which likewise made regular
flights over eastern Russia) but the latter simply didn't have the
range to do what the 36 (and later the 52) was capable of.

Very quickly these flights were made unnecessary by the U-2, and the
U-2 in turn was soon supplanted by satellite photography.


all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

[Ron Natalie]

"Cub Driver" > wrote in message
...

> Very quickly these flights were made unnecessary by the U-2, and the
> U-2 in turn was soon supplanted by satellite photography.

Not supplanted, augmented. We're still using the U2's. There was also
this
black thing called an SR71

[Cub Driver]

>> I think he wanted the protestor to take his argument to Harry Truman
>> in 1945.
>
>I was referring to the protests that preceded the Iraq invasion.

Nevertheless, the poster seemed to be referring to the earlier
incident: Little Boy.

The purpose of a protest is to protest. Nobody expects it to succeed!
Sheez. A whole generation spoiled rotten by the Vietnam War.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

[G.R. Patterson III]

Dan Luke wrote:
>
> It would surprise me to learn that the Soviets were terrified of a
> weapon based on the thoroughly discredited idea that heavily armed,
> unescorted strategic bombers could fight their way deep into enemy
> territory with acceptable losses.

You mean like the losses the B-29s took bombing Japan? Of course, the losses to
the B-17s against Germany were worse. Lets take the worst case there. We lost
something over 60% of the planes that flew the Schweinfurt "Black Thursday" raid
and over half the planes made it to the target. At one time, we could have
launched over 30 B-36s at any given moment. So only 10 of them reach their
targets. Stalin isn't going to be upset at the prospect of losing 10 major
production centers? He would certainly be worried about the fact that the odds
were good that he'd be in one of them.

> The B-36 always struck me as a flying
> porkbarrel project propelled by Curtis LeMay's ego.

The B-36 project was started prior to America's entry into WWII. Roosevelt was
afraid that Britain would be lost and that the U.S. would have to enter the war
against Germany without being able to base bombers in the British Isles. It was
planned that we would use it for a conventional bombing campaign against Germany
operating from bases in the U.S. Postwar development was a case basically of the
only game in town. It was the only plane capable of carrying nuclear weapons into
the USSR that could possibly reach production in a few years. It was a stopgap
measure, but it worked until we could get something better in place.

George Patterson
Great discoveries are not announced with "Eureka!". What's usually said is
"Hummmmm... That's interesting...."

[Brien K. Meehan]

Rob Perkins > wrote in message >...
> Aren't protests usually more effective if they're done *before* an
> event takes place?

As far as I can tell, protests aren't intended to affect events.

Rather, they seem to exist solely for the self-gratification of the
participants. They fail even in this regard because there's
ultimately no satisfaction to be found in immersing yourself in
irrationality and hatred.

[Philip Sondericker]

in article VxIEb.402384$Dw6.1250716@attbi_s02, Newps at
wrote on 12/19/03 11:43 AM:


> plumb bob wrote:
>> Again, I find it
>> very disappointing that this generation is not better remembered.
>
> You've got to be kidding. The WWII generation is the most remembered in
> history. At any given time I can find a program on TV relating to WWII.
> There have been more books written about WWII than any other. There
> are numerous monuments relating to WWII in many places. Pearl Harbor
> and the flag raising on Iwo Jima sculpture come to mind.

Thank you. I have often wondered why so many people cling to the absurd
notion that the WWII generation is "forgotten". Someone else in this thread
mentioned The History Channel--often called "The Hitlery Channel", since
it's pretty much all WWII all the time. There are numerous other examples,
from "Saving Private Ryan" to "Band of Brothers", to countless books. For
the record, I have no problem with any of that--I share the fascination with
that period of history, and I would certainly hope that it's never
forgotten.

[Tom Sixkiller]

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Dan Luke wrote:
> >
> > It would surprise me to learn that the Soviets were terrified of a
> > weapon based on the thoroughly discredited idea that heavily armed,
> > unescorted strategic bombers could fight their way deep into enemy
> > territory with acceptable losses.
>
> You mean like the losses the B-29s took bombing Japan? Of course, the
losses to
> the B-17s against Germany were worse. Lets take the worst case there. We
lost
> something over 60% of the planes that flew the Schweinfurt "Black
Thursday" raid
> and over half the planes made it to the target.

Not 60%, George...60 PLANES...out of over 300 that took on the mission. I've
leave the math (one-fifth, for the math challenged) to you.

[Cub Driver]

>That's EXACTLY what everyone said about the Viet Nam Veteran's Memorial,
>before it opened.

Probably said by the same sort of people who designed the WWII
memorial, and who later added the patrolling troopers (and even later
the nurse) to Maya Lin's magnificent sculpture.

There is only one Wall. I saw it one early morning before going to
work (I get up at five, which was always a problem when I was on the
road) and just stood there with tears running down my face.

The patrol had been added by that time. I rather liked the little
statues, as if these guys had just returned from an ambush and come
upon the bodies of 158,000 of their mates. That was before the nurse
came along. (Is she carrying a bedpan?) But the Wall would have been
just as good without them.

A Wall comes along only once in a century. There's no use hoping that
the WWII memorial or the Ground Zero thing will be in that class.


all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

[Jay Honeck]

> Probably said by the same sort of people who designed the WWII
> memorial, and who later added the patrolling troopers (and even later
> the nurse) to Maya Lin's magnificent sculpture.

Well, I think it was a lot more commonly felt than that.

I know I thought it was a patently absurd design -- until I saw it complete.
The wall has a weight and drama that a mere drawing cannot hope to capture.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Dan Luke]

"G.R. Patterson III" wrote:
> You mean like the losses the B-29s took bombing Japan?

The Japanese air forces were too decimated and technologically too
inferior for effective interception of the fast, high flying B-29s. That
would not have been the case with B-36s vs. Soviet air power.

> At one time, we could have launched over 30 B-36s at any given moment.
> So only 10 of them reach their targets.

That is by no means certain, given the vast distances the B-36s would
have had to fly unescorted.

> He would certainly be worried about the fact that the odds were good
that
> he'd be in one of them.

He would have had a long time to get out of town.

> > The B-36 always struck me as a flying
> > porkbarrel project propelled by Curtis LeMay's ego.
>
> It was the only plane capable of carrying nuclear weapons into
> the USSR that could possibly reach production in a few years.

What about the B-29 (and B-50)? We had a lot more of them, and there
were plenty of runways in Europe they could use, which was not the case
with the B-36.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

[Dan Luke]

"Cub Driver" wrote:
> Such flights were probably made in excess of 50,000 feet.

Would it have been operationally practical (or even possible) to drop
nukes from such altitudes?
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

[Dennis O'Connor]

Given that the soviet planners had thought all this through, in my mind it
is unlikely that a single bomber would have gotten through... The soviets
had rings of interceptor squadrons, numbering in the thousands - cheap,
short range, totally expendable, fast climbing jet fighters... Each bomber
would have been like a sparrow flying into one cloud of hornets after
another... That is why ICBM's are the weapon of deterrence, not bombers...

Denny
"Dan Luke" > wrote in message
...
> "G.R. Patterson III" wrote:
> > You mean like the losses the B-29s took bombing Japan?
>

[G.R. Patterson III]

Dan Luke wrote:
>
> Would it have been operationally practical (or even possible) to drop
> nukes from such altitudes?

Absolutely. The main problem with bombing from altitudes higher than about
30,000'
is the fact that accuracy suffers once you get into or above jet streams. Heavy
bombs, such as the early nuclear weapons or the conventional "grand slam" bomb
are
less subject to being deflected by the winds, and, with nukes, it really doesn't
matter much if you're a mile off target.

George Patterson
Great discoveries are not announced with "Eureka!". What's usually said is
"Hummmmm... That's interesting...."

[Cub Driver]

On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 06:36:54 -0500, Cub Driver
> wrote:

> as if these guys had just returned from an ambush and come
>upon the bodies of 158,000 of their mates.

Oops! Fingers all thumbs. That should be 58,000, of course.


all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

[Cub Driver]

>with nukes, it really doesn't
>matter much if you're a mile off target.

As I recall (somewhat vaguely) that was very nearly the case with the
Nagasaki bomb.


all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

[Cub Driver]

The discussion I believe was about the B-36. It flew above the
absolute ceiling of contemporary MiG fighters. The British begged for
a chance to challenge the 36, but the USAF wisely ignored them. No
American fighter of the time could get up there, and no Russian
either.

In tests over Florida, in the rare cases where an interceptor could
match the 36's altitude, all the bomber had to do was execute a slow
turn. When the fighter matched it, it fell away. And nobody knows if
the 36 was flying at its absolute ceiling in those tests; evidently it
could go much higher.

On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 11:07:48 -0500, "Dennis O'Connor"
> wrote:

>Given that the soviet planners had thought all this through, in my mind it
>is unlikely that a single bomber would have gotten through... The soviets
>had rings of interceptor squadrons, numbering in the thousands - cheap,
>short range, totally expendable, fast climbing jet fighters... Each bomber
>would have been like a sparrow flying into one cloud of hornets after
>another... That is why ICBM's are the weapon of deterrence, not bombers...

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

[Tom Sixkiller]

"Cub Driver" > wrote in message
...
>
> The discussion I believe was about the B-36. It flew above the
> absolute ceiling of contemporary MiG fighters. The British begged for
> a chance to challenge the 36, but the USAF wisely ignored them. No
> American fighter of the time could get up there, and no Russian
> either.
>
> In tests over Florida, in the rare cases where an interceptor could
> match the 36's altitude, all the bomber had to do was execute a slow
> turn. When the fighter matched it, it fell away. And nobody knows if
> the 36 was flying at its absolute ceiling in those tests; evidently it
> could go much higher.

While the B-36 was obsolete within a few years, it did have the altitude
capabilities you mention. Whats more, the MiG-15 could not reach those
altitudes; even if they could their oxygen systems were so bad their pilots
would be passing out long before they could climb high enough to intercept.

OTOH, read Chcuk Yeagers auto-biography where he speaks of intercepting the
B-36 and how they tried to stack the tests in favor of the '36.

[Jay Honeck]

> The discussion I believe was about the B-36. It flew above the
> absolute ceiling of contemporary MiG fighters. The British begged for
> a chance to challenge the 36, but the USAF wisely ignored them.

Why? I take it the British fighters *could* get 'em?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Cub Driver" > wrote in message
...
>
> The discussion I believe was about the B-36. It flew above the
> absolute ceiling of contemporary MiG fighters. The British begged for
> a chance to challenge the 36, but the USAF wisely ignored them. No
> American fighter of the time could get up there, and no Russian
> either.
>

Are you sure about the British? I recall reading of a similar desire by the
US Navy. The Navy wanted more funding, money that was going to the B-36. I
can't see what the British would have to gain. Of course, I can't see why
the Navy would have to beg for a chance to challenge the B-36 either. Just
do it.

[Roger Hamlett]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:NbiFb.618902$Fm2.558090@attbi_s04...
> > The discussion I believe was about the B-36. It flew above the
> > absolute ceiling of contemporary MiG fighters. The British begged for
> > a chance to challenge the 36, but the USAF wisely ignored them.
>
> Why? I take it the British fighters *could* get 'em?
Lets put it this way, There was the case some years ago, of a U2, coming
over the UK, in excess of 82000ft, with his camera doors open. When two
fighters came up on his wingtips, and 'invited' him to come down and
explain, the comment from the pilot afterwards was "we didn't realise you
could get so high". Back in those days, the ceiling of the old
'frightening', was limited primarily by the fact that you burnt so much fuel
getting up there...

Best Wishes

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
...
>
> In the late 40s, Rolls-Royce made the best jet engines in the world. The
Russians
> put copies of that engine in the MiG-17 after a socialist British
government gave
> them the design.
>

MiG-15.

[Tom Sixkiller]

"Roger Hamlett" > wrote in message
...
> Lets put it this way, There was the case some years ago, of a U2, coming
> over the UK, in excess of 82000ft, with his camera doors open. When two
> fighters came up on his wingtips, and 'invited' him to come down and
> explain, the comment from the pilot afterwards was "we didn't realise you
> could get so high". Back in those days, the ceiling of the old
> 'frightening', was limited primarily by the fact that you burnt so much
fuel
> getting up there...


Hmmm...what fighter could reach 82,000 feet in those days, short of an
experimental (F-104...)?

[Mike Beede]

In article >, Roger Hamlett > wrote:

> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> news:NbiFb.618902$Fm2.558090@attbi_s04...
> > > The discussion I believe was about the B-36. It flew above the
> > > absolute ceiling of contemporary MiG fighters. The British begged for
> > > a chance to challenge the 36, but the USAF wisely ignored them.
> >
> > Why? I take it the British fighters *could* get 'em?
> Lets put it this way, There was the case some years ago, of a U2, coming
> over the UK, in excess of 82000ft, with his camera doors open. When two
> fighters came up on his wingtips, and 'invited' him to come down and
> explain, the comment from the pilot afterwards was "we didn't realise you
> could get so high". Back in those days, the ceiling of the old
> 'frightening', was limited primarily by the fact that you burnt so much fuel
> getting up there...

Do you have a citation? It seems unlikely that the Lightning could get that
high, and if it could, it seems completely impossible that it could operate
at the same airspeed as the U-2 (that slow, that is).

Thanks,

Mike Beede

[Roger Hamlett]

"Tom Sixkiller" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Roger Hamlett" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Lets put it this way, There was the case some years ago, of a U2, coming
> > over the UK, in excess of 82000ft, with his camera doors open. When two
> > fighters came up on his wingtips, and 'invited' him to come down and
> > explain, the comment from the pilot afterwards was "we didn't realise
you
> > could get so high". Back in those days, the ceiling of the old
> > 'frightening', was limited primarily by the fact that you burnt so much
> fuel
> > getting up there...
>
>
> Hmmm...what fighter could reach 82,000 feet in those days, short of an
> experimental (F-104...)?
Sorry, 62000feet (what is 20000 feet after all...). The 'frightening', had a
claimed ceiling of 67000 feet, and the pilot who took it there, siad it
could still have got higher, but his fuel duration limited the attempt.

Best Wishes

[G.R. Patterson III]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>
> > The discussion I believe was about the B-36. It flew above the
> > absolute ceiling of contemporary MiG fighters. The British begged for
> > a chance to challenge the 36, but the USAF wisely ignored them.
>
> Why? I take it the British fighters *could* get 'em?

In the late 40s, Rolls-Royce made the best jet engines in the world. The Russians
put copies of that engine in the MiG-17 after a socialist British government gave
them the design.

George Patterson
Great discoveries are not announced with "Eureka!". What's usually said is
"Hummmmm... That's interesting...."

[Cub Driver]

>> The discussion I believe was about the B-36. It flew above the
>> absolute ceiling of contemporary MiG fighters. The British begged for
>> a chance to challenge the 36, but the USAF wisely ignored them.
>
>Why? I take it the British fighters *could* get 'em?

Yes, the British held the world altitude record at that time. (The
B-36, in the interests of secrecy, showed a much lower service ceiling
than the plane could actually fly comfortably.)

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

[Margy Natalie]

I couldn't find the dent when I went looking on that day, but I'm not sure I
looking anywhere near where the bottle hit. From what I hear the skin is
dented. The aluminum bent before the bottle could break and the Enola Gay is up
on lifts so the paint went all over a P-47 instead. The crew had the whole mess
cleaned up way before I got over there (of course I didn't manage to get over
there for an hour or more).

Rumor mill says they are going for felony destruction of property which could be
life for a 73 year old depending on his genetics.

Margy

Gene Kearns wrote:

> On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 15:30:46 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> > wrote:
>
> >I'm surprised no one has brought up this travesty.
> >
> >For those who don't know, the Enola Gay -- beautifully refurbished and now
> >on display at the new Udvar-Hazy facility of the National Air & Space
> >Museum -- was damaged by some nut case from Ohio who threw something at the
> >plane and dented it during a protest against the atomic bombing of Japan.
> >
> >If it were up to me, a life sentence without hope of parole would be too
> >good for this jerk. To damage an irreplaceable aircraft, and a piece of
> >history, is absolutely unconscionable.
> >
> >Margy, how bad is it?
>
> Life might be a bit too severe. I'd go for 20 years in the electric
> chair.

[Wdtabor]

In article >, Margy Natalie > writes:

>
>Rumor mill says they are going for felony destruction of property which could
>be
>life for a 73 year old depending on his genetics.
>

We can only hope.

Don

--
Wm. Donald (Don) Tabor Jr., DDS
PP-ASEL
Chesapeake, VA - CPK, PVG

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article >,
(Wdtabor) wrote:

> In article >, Margy Natalie >
> writes:
>
> >
> >Rumor mill says they are going for felony destruction of property which
> >could
> >be
> >life for a 73 year old depending on his genetics.
> >
>
> We can only hope.
>
> Don


It just goes to show that there's no fool like an old fool!

[Jim Weir]

No, no, no. That's 80/87 gasoline. "There's no fuel like an old fuel."

{;-)


Jim


Orval Fairbairn >
shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:

->
->
->It just goes to show that there's no fool like an old fool!


Jim Weir (A&P/IA, CFI, & other good alphabet soup)
VP Eng RST Pres. Cyberchapter EAA Tech. Counselor
http://www.rst-engr.com

[john smith]

Jim Weir wrote:
>
> No, no, no. That's 80/87 gasoline. "There's no fuel like an old fuel."

Red Pop!

[G.R. Patterson III]

john smith wrote:
>
> Jim Weir wrote:
> >
> > No, no, no. That's 80/87 gasoline. "There's no fuel like an old fuel."
>
> Red Pop!

A Cherokee father is some type of gasoline?

George Patterson
Great discoveries are not announced with "Eureka!". What's usually said is
"Hummmmm... That's interesting...."

[G.R. Patterson III]

Margy Natalie wrote:
>
> Rumor mill says they are going for felony destruction of property which could be
> life for a 73 year old depending on his genetics.

Good. Hope they set the bail at a couple million.

George Patterson
Great discoveries are not announced with "Eureka!". What's usually said is
"Hummmmm... That's interesting...."

[Cub Driver]

>I couldn't find the dent when I went looking on that day, but I'm not sure I
>looking anywhere near where the bottle hit. From what I hear the skin is
>dented.

I studied the nose of the plane on Saturday, from the walkway just
above it (and separated from the plane by a glass or plastic barrier).
I definitely saw a dent on the port side, fairly low, and I think
behind the pilot glass. It was not large, and I suppose could have
been in the plane as restored.

(It was not mirror-smooth overall.)

A wonderful museum, Margy. I even approved of the food facilities! (No
decisions to make!) The only downer for me was the temperature of the
gift shop. I was under strict orders to bring back something for my
granddaughters that was suitable for winter wear (no T-shirts) and I
very nearly passed out from the heat, humidity, and jostle.


all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

[Margy Natalie]

Cub Driver wrote:

> >I couldn't find the dent when I went looking on that day, but I'm not sure I
> >looking anywhere near where the bottle hit. From what I hear the skin is
> >dented.
>
> I studied the nose of the plane on Saturday, from the walkway just
> above it (and separated from the plane by a glass or plastic barrier).
> I definitely saw a dent on the port side, fairly low, and I think
> behind the pilot glass. It was not large, and I suppose could have
> been in the plane as restored.
>
> (It was not mirror-smooth overall.)

I'll have to go back for another look. I should wait until the curator for the
plane is out at Udvar-Hazy and ask him to show me.

>
>
> A wonderful museum, Margy. I even approved of the food facilities! (No
> decisions to make!) The only downer for me was the temperature of the
> gift shop. I was under strict orders to bring back something for my
> granddaughters that was suitable for winter wear (no T-shirts) and I
> very nearly passed out from the heat, humidity, and jostle.

It is wonderful. Good news and bad the Subway is temporary until the McDonald's
complex is finished (If it's like downtown it will be McDonalds, Boston Market
and Donato's Pizza). I try to avoid the gift shop as it's hard on the credit
card, but temperature variations in the building are being worked on, so I'm sure
it's on the list. If the gift shop is too hot, drop by my office where I have,
on occasion, worn my coat!

Margy

>
>
> all the best -- Dan Ford
> email:
>
> see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
> and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com