![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Lets get this newsgroup back on topic. So for starters a question to
our retired and other non-active naval aviators: Which aircraft would you have most wanted to fly that wasn't yet available during your days as a Naval Aviator? Why? -- ACC USN ret NKX BIKF NAB CV-63 NIR 67-69 69-71 71-74 77-80 80-85 & 74-77 founder of newsgroup - RAMN |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Jim" wrote in message
... Which aircraft would you have most wanted to fly that wasn't yet available during your days as a Naval Aviator? Why? Does that include the days as a Student Naval Aviator? If so: T-28 It didn't look like a pregnant guppy. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The Martin P6M SeaMaster.
I watched its development while in college, its role as a sea-based long range jet bomber, maritime patrol plane, and eventually its recasting as an aerial mine layer to (try and) escape Air Force criticism (as it was impinging on the AF's self-designed, exclusive role in strategic bombing,) would have given it a global mission limited only by seaplane tender location and, of course, local sea states. It was a magnificent flying machine killed by unfortunate incidents in its testing phase and AF jealousy as strategic roles developed in the late 1950's. USN killed it as a fight not worth fighting. J. McEachen VAH-5 Jim wrote: Lets get this newsgroup back on topic. So for starters a question to our retired and other non-active naval aviators: Which aircraft would you have most wanted to fly that wasn't yet available during your days as a Naval Aviator? Why? |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jan 31, 3:55*pm, Jim wrote:
Lets get this newsgroup back on topic. *So for starters a question to our retired and other non-active naval aviators: Which aircraft would you have most wanted to fly that wasn't yet available during your days as a Naval Aviator? *Why? -- * * * * * *ACC *USN ret * NKX * *BIKF * NAB * CV-63 * NIR 67-69 * 69-71 *71-74 *77-80 * 80-85 * *& 74-77 * *founder of newsgroup - RAMN Blimps.........because they are serene. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I agree on the T-28, having flown it as a student and then again for three
years as a Maint. Test pilot it was just a lot of fun. Flew it all over the country on cross countries. On 2/1/08 4:56 PM, in article , "Frank Minich" wrote: "Jim" wrote in message ... Which aircraft would you have most wanted to fly that wasn't yet available during your days as a Naval Aviator? Why? Does that include the days as a Student Naval Aviator? If so: T-28 It didn't look like a pregnant guppy. -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
If we can expand the scope of the question to those denied their dream
by lousy vision (and hey, it turned out great anyways) . . . I think I would have loved to flown the A-4 (fun to fly) A-6 (great aircraft) , or despite all of its warts, the A-5 (sexy at zero knots and zero altitude). Make me choose one . . . the A-6. Take care . . . John |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
"War of the Worlds" Aircraft - Liaison aircraft | William R Thompson | Aviation Photos | 12 | June 1st 07 08:47 PM |
Solar powered aircraft. Was: Can Aircraft Be Far Behind? | Jim Logajan | Piloting | 4 | February 9th 07 01:11 PM |
Delaware LLC Owned Aircraft California Based Aircraft | ChrisEllis | Piloting | 6 | January 17th 06 03:47 AM |
Commercial rating: complex aircraft required aircraft for practical test? | Marc J. Zeitlin | Piloting | 22 | November 24th 05 04:11 AM |
Experience transitioning from C-172 to complex aircraft as potential first owned aircraft? | Jack Allison | Owning | 12 | June 14th 04 08:01 PM |