Log in

View Full Version : A story from a Grunt Aviatior in Iraq


Tina
July 19th 07, 07:22 PM
Now this is not a very ladylike posting, but this story is something
the readers of this newsgroup will enjoy.


This is from a colorful writer from the 3rd Marine Air Wing based at
MCAS Miramar:

There I was at six thousand feet over central Iraq , two hundred
eighty
knots and we're dropping faster than Paris Hilton's panties. It's a
typical September evening in the Persian Gulf; hotter than a rectal
thermometer and I'm sweating like a priest at a Cub Scout meeting.
But that's
neither here nor there. The night is moonless over Baghdad tonight,
and blacker
than a Steven King novel. But it's 2006, folks, and I'm sporting the
latest
in night-combat technology - namely, hand-me-down night vision goggles
(NVGs) thrown out by the fighter boys.

Additionally, my 1962 Lockheed C-130E Hercules is equipped with an
obsolete, yet, semi-effective missile warning system (MWS). The MWS
conveniently makes a nice soothing tone in your headset just before
the missile
explodes into your airplane. Who says you can't polish a turd?

At any rate, the NVGs are illuminating Baghdad International Airport
like the Las Vegas Strip during a Mike Tyson fight. These NVGs are
the
cat's ass.

But I've digressed. The preferred method of approach tonight is the
random shallow. This tactical maneuver allows the pilot to ingress
the
landing zone in an unpredictable manner, thus exploiting the
supposedly
secured perimeter of the airfield in an attempt to avoid enemy
surface-to-air-missiles and small arms fire. Personally, I wouldn't
bet my pink ass on that theory but the approach is fun as hell and
that's
the real reason we fly it. We get a visual on the runway at three
miles out,
drop down to one thousand feet above the ground, still maintaining two
hundred eighty knots. Now the fun starts.

It's pilot appreciation time as I descend the mighty Herc to six
hundred feet and smoothly, yet very deliberately, yank into a sixty
degree
left bank turning the aircraft ninety degrees offset from runway
heading. As
soon as we roll out of the turn, I reverse turn to the right a full
two
hundred seventy degrees in order to roll out aligned with the runway.
Some
aeronautical genius coined this maneuver the "Ninety/Two-Seventy."

Chopping the power during the turn, I pull back on the yoke just to
the point my nether regions start to sag, bleeding off energy in order
to
configure the pig for landing. "Flaps Fifty! Landing Gear Down!,
Before Landing Checklist!" I look over at the copilot and he's
shaking like
a cat ****ting on a sheet of ice. Looking further back at the
navigator,
and even through the NVGs, I can clearly see the wet spot spreading
around his
crotch. Finally, I glance at my steely eyed flight engineer. His
eyebrows rise in unison as a grin forms on his face. I can tell he's
thinking
the same thing I am .... "Where do we find such fine young men?"

"Flaps One Hundred!" I bark at the shaking cat. Now it's all aim-
point and
airspeed. Aviation 101, with the exception there are no lights, I'm
on
NVGs, it's Baghdad , and now tracers are starting to crisscross the
black sky. Naturally, and not at all surprisingly, I grease the
Goodyear's
on brick-one of runway 33 left, bring the throttles to ground idle and
then force the props to full reverse pitch. Tonight, the sound of
freedom
is my four Hamilton Standard propellers chewing through the thick,
putrid,
Baghdad air. The huge, one hundred forty-thousand pound, lumbering
whisper
pig comes to a lurching stop in less than two thousand feet. Let's
see a
Viper do that!

We exit the runway to a welcoming committee of government issued Army
grunts. It's time to download their beans and bullets and letters
from
their sweethearts, look for war booty, and of course, urinate on
Saddam 's home. Walking down the crew entry steps with my lowest-
bidder,
Beretta 92F, 9 millimeter strapped smartly to my side, look around and
thank God,
not Allah, I'm an American and I'm on the winning team. Then I thank
God
I'm not in the Army.

Knowing once again I've cheated death, I ask myself, "What in the
hell am I doing in this mess?" Is it Duty, Honor, and Country? You
bet your
ass. Or could it possibly be for the glory, the swag, and not to
mention,
chicks dig the Air Medal. There's probably some truth there too. But
now is
not the time to derive the complexities of the superior, cerebral
properties
of the human portion of the aviator-man-machine model. It is however,
time
to get out of this hole. Hey copilot, how's 'bout the 'Before
Starting
Engines Checklist."

God, I love this job! Semper Fidelis


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ktbr
July 19th 07, 08:01 PM
Great! Thanks for the post. When America stops producing
aviators of this character is when we have to start worrying.

Larry Dighera
July 20th 07, 12:36 AM
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 19:01:37 GMT, ktbr > wrote in
>:

>When America stops producing
>aviators of this character is when we have to start worrying.

Are you referring to the one who wet his seat, or the one with the apt
metaphors? :-)

Tina
July 20th 07, 01:22 AM
I would submit, Larry, all four crew members were there, afraid or
not. We might admire even more the courage of those who were afraid
and still strapped themselves into that airplane and flew it again.

Aren't we lucky to have them?

Denny
July 20th 07, 12:21 PM
On Jul 19, 8:22 pm, Tina > wrote:
> I would submit, Larry, all four crew members were there, afraid or
> not. We might admire even more the courage of those who were afraid
> and still strapped themselves into that airplane and flew it again.
>
> Aren't we lucky to have them?

Yes...
It is fat, old men who start wars to preserve their grasp on power...
It is young men who strap on weapons and go out to bleed and die for
those fat, old men...

denny

ktbr
July 20th 07, 06:04 PM
Denny wrote:
>
> Yes...
> It is fat, old men who start wars to preserve their grasp on power...
> It is young men who strap on weapons and go out to bleed and die for
> those fat, old men...
>
Which "fat, old men" are you referring to? I'm sorta curious....

george
July 20th 07, 09:31 PM
On Jul 21, 5:04 am, ktbr > wrote:
> Denny wrote:
>
> > Yes...
> > It is fat, old men who start wars to preserve their grasp on power...
> > It is young men who strap on weapons and go out to bleed and die for
> > those fat, old men...
>
> Which "fat, old men" are you referring to? I'm sorta curious....

Those 'old fat men' were once the young men who strap on the weapons?

Kloudy via AviationKB.com
July 20th 07, 11:40 PM
Tina wrote:
>Now this is not a very ladylike posting, but this story is something
>the readers of this newsgroup will enjoy.
>
>left bank turning the aircraft ninety degrees offset from runway
>heading. As soon as we roll out of the turn, I reverse turn to the right a full
>two hundred seventy degrees in order to roll out aligned with the runway.
>Some aeronautical genius coined this maneuver the "Ninety/Two-Seventy."
>
I drew this maneuver out on paper and by the gods it lloks like he'd be
flying away from the rwy.

Or did my brain come loose again?

--
Message posted via http://www.aviationkb.com

Kloudy via AviationKB.com
July 20th 07, 11:41 PM
Kloudy wrote:
>I drew this maneuver out on paper and by the gods it lloks like he'd be
>flying away from the rwy.
>
>Or did my brain come loose again?

nope.. 270 deg minus 90 = 180

Hmm....Marine a- v 8 ors

--
Message posted via http://www.aviationkb.com

Tina
July 21st 07, 12:01 AM
I wondered about that too. Maybe he approached in downwind direction,
turned 90 degrees from the runway, then used the 270 to stay within
the limits of the airport and when he rolled out would be facing the
opposite direction, upwind, and touched down.

It might make sense if the bad guys would have expected him to fly the
approach into the wind all the way -- they'd be stationed along the
extended final centerline and his path would be downwind over the
centerline, 90 degrees to crosswind, then downwind again blending to
base blending to final, all within the boundary of the airport.

Tina




On Jul 20, 6:41 pm, "Kloudy via AviationKB.com" <u33403@uwe> wrote:
> Kloudy wrote:
> >I drew this maneuver out on paper and by the gods it lloks like he'd be
> >flying away from the rwy.
>
> >Or did my brain come loose again?
>
> nope.. 270 deg minus 90 = 180
>
> Hmm....Marine a- v 8 ors
>
> --
> Message posted viahttp://www.aviationkb.com

Paul Riley
July 21st 07, 12:08 AM
Glad to see you folk finally figured it out. Never flew in combat, never got
shot at, did you!!

Paul (two tours in Vietnam, flying helicopter gunships--and survived)
"Tina" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>I wondered about that too. Maybe he approached in downwind direction,
> turned 90 degrees from the runway, then used the 270 to stay within
> the limits of the airport and when he rolled out would be facing the
> opposite direction, upwind, and touched down.
>
> It might make sense if the bad guys would have expected him to fly the
> approach into the wind all the way -- they'd be stationed along the
> extended final centerline and his path would be downwind over the
> centerline, 90 degrees to crosswind, then downwind again blending to
> base blending to final, all within the boundary of the airport.
>
> Tina
>
>
>
>
> On Jul 20, 6:41 pm, "Kloudy via AviationKB.com" <u33403@uwe> wrote:
>> Kloudy wrote:
>> >I drew this maneuver out on paper and by the gods it lloks like he'd be
>> >flying away from the rwy.
>>
>> >Or did my brain come loose again?
>>
>> nope.. 270 deg minus 90 = 180
>>
>> Hmm....Marine a- v 8 ors
>>
>> --
>> Message posted viahttp://www.aviationkb.com
>
>

Tina
July 21st 07, 12:31 AM
The only shots fired at me are verbal ones, most are misses.

Tina

Bob Fry
July 21st 07, 02:00 AM
>>>>> "Tina" == Tina > writes:

Tina> There I was at six thousand feet over central Iraq , two
Tina> hundred eighty knots and we're dropping faster than Paris
Tina> Hilton's panties.

<rest of fictional tripe snipped>

This is BS, untrustworthy CR*P!!! The poster is a clueless liar.
EVERYBODY knows Paris doesn't even WEAR panties!!

--
On the other hand, we have different fingers.
- Jack Handey

Tina
July 21st 07, 02:03 AM
I didn't know that, and somehow don't much care

(Ms) Tina
>
> <rest of fictional tripe snipped>
>
> This is BS, untrustworthy CR*P!!! The poster is a clueless liar.
> EVERYBODY knows Paris doesn't even WEAR panties!!
>
> --
> On the other hand, we have different fingers.
> - Jack Handey

Jim Logajan
July 21st 07, 02:06 AM
Bob Fry > wrote:
>>>>>> "Tina" == Tina > writes:
>
> Tina> There I was at six thousand feet over central Iraq , two
> Tina> hundred eighty knots and we're dropping faster than Paris
> Tina> Hilton's panties.
>
> <rest of fictional tripe snipped>
>
> This is BS, untrustworthy CR*P!!! The poster is a clueless liar.
> EVERYBODY knows Paris doesn't even WEAR panties!!

I'd like to see the proof to your outrageous assertion!

Scott[_5_]
July 21st 07, 03:39 AM
On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 01:06:20 -0000, in rec.aviation.piloting, Jim Logajan
> wrote:

>Bob Fry > wrote:
>> This is BS, untrustworthy CR*P!!! The poster is a clueless liar.
>> EVERYBODY knows Paris doesn't even WEAR panties!!
>
>I'd like to see the proof to your outrageous assertion!

No, you wouldn't. It's not worth it. I've seen it, and by all that is good
and holy, there isn't enough eye bleach in the world to ever unsee it!

-Scott

Jim Logajan
July 21st 07, 06:12 AM
(Scott) wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 01:06:20 -0000, in rec.aviation.piloting, Jim
> Logajan > wrote:
>
>>Bob Fry > wrote:
>>> This is BS, untrustworthy CR*P!!! The poster is a clueless liar.
>>> EVERYBODY knows Paris doesn't even WEAR panties!!
>>
>>I'd like to see the proof to your outrageous assertion!
>
> No, you wouldn't. It's not worth it. I've seen it, and by all that
> is good and holy, there isn't enough eye bleach in the world to ever
> unsee it!

I believe you.

C Gattman
July 24th 07, 09:39 PM
"george" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>> fat, old men...
>>
>> Which "fat, old men" are you referring to? I'm sorta curious....
>
> Those 'old fat men' were once the young men who strap on the weapons?

Cheney? Karl Rove? Don't think so.

I rather like the original quote, although it reminds me more of the
fireeaters and aristocrats who are more or less responsible for starting the
American civil war.

-c

Tina
July 26th 07, 10:28 PM
In the interest of full disclosure, I got this email today about my
posting of this story.

Think of it as the other side of the coin. Now I have a problem,
because I liked the initial story, but these comments are worthy of
your consideration as well.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: 6,000 ft over central Iraq in C-130E


Now you know why I despise arrogant pilots (not all, just this kind)!
Entertainingly written, yes; full of hyperbole, definitely, this jerk
has
his head up his ___! Tracers criss-crossing the sky, in 2006?
Denigration
of chicken-**** crew members? MWS semi-effective? Cheating death?
Pilot
appreciation time? How many times have you heard of a C-130 being
shot up
over Iraq or Afghanistan? If this "officer" gets promoted past
captain,
shame on the Marines. That's not the reality of the C-130 world,
either in
danger or crew capability. I am not impressed.

Know you're just passing it along, but thought I'd share my take on
this BS.
Glad I'm not flying with the Marines.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I hadn't thought about these points, was glad to have them pointed
out.

The comment at the end of the story about chicks liking marine pilots?
Still holds for me, even if some are carried away with their story
telling. Bless 'em all!

Tina

Dennis Johnson
July 27th 07, 06:14 AM
I flew the C-130 in Vietnam and enjoyed the colorful story about flying it
in Iraq. Sure, it was hyperbole, sure it went way over the top,
particularly in regards to making fun of the other crewmembers. However, it
was so far over the top that it clearly didn't represent reality and I just
read it as a funny fictional story.

As far as accuracy goes, I'm surprised they would still be flying E models;
the Air Force switched to H models shortly after Vietnam. In Vietnam, we
did random steep approaches, not random shallow approaches. And the concept
of the 90-270 seems to me to violate the idea that the approach is random.
Random approaches make it more likely that you are going to avoid flying
over a place where the enemy is expecting you. But that was then, and this
is now, and I'm sure things have changed. And I'm sure the Marines have
different procedures than the Air Force.

Dennis

Google