THE PILOT WHO WOULDN'T FLY

THE PILOT WHO WOULDN'T FLY

I am only telling you this story because he passed away two years ago. I won't
reveal his identity. Let's call him Captain Johnson.
Captain Johnson's plane was badly hit over the target. He and his crew bailed
out. But Johnson never liked to keep his chute harness buckled tight. It gave
him cramps. So he wore it loose. On this occasion, as he bailed out he slipped
out of the harness and it tangled around his foot. That meant that he dangled
head down in his chute as he came to earth. He was badly shook up on landing
and hospitalized with severe cuts and bruises and a good deal of shock. After
he recovered he was returned to duty. At that time we needed 65 missions to go
home. He had 62, Only three more to go. But he refused to ever fly again. This
was serious business with a war on. He was sent to London and a staff of
psychiatrists worked on him, but he wouldn't fly. Then they said if he flew as
an observer on the lead aircraft he could get 1½ missions credit for each
mission, He could fly two and get credit for three, and go home. He still
refused to fly. What was to be done? You can't really court marshal a man with
62 missions for cowardice in face of the enemy. But he still wouldn't fly. But
everyone else in the 344th damn well had to fly. Feelings were running high.
The talk around the group was, "If I have to fly, then he has to fly. No free
lunch. He had a bad bailout? Too frigging bad. We all have our troubles." My
pilot Paul Shorts said, "he was weak". When his name was brought up, the
universal response was disgust. Then one day he was gone. Fast forward 15 years
to a reunion of the 344th Bomb Group. Who should walk in but our old friend
Captain Johnson. No one spoke to him. Many just turned their backs on him. I
felt sorry for him. But while we were risking our necks over Germany and losing
good men, he was curled up and whining under a blanket. He flew with us, but
not a single man in the 344th considered him to be one of us.
Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

(ArtKramr) wrote:

YOSSARIAN, THE PILOT WHO WOULDN'T FLY

What a bunch of brain-dead ******s you are/were. PINKS.

Grantland

In message , ArtKramr
writes
THE PILOT WHO WOULDN'T FLY

There, but for the Grace of God....

Mike
--
M.J.Powell

Subject: THE PILOT WHO WOULDN'T FLY
From: "M. J. Powell"
Date: 2/3/04 1:25 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

In message , ArtKramr
writes
THE PILOT WHO WOULDN'T FLY

There, but for the Grace of God....

Mike
--
M.J.Powell

YUP !


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

I'm curious here. Would it have been different if he broke his back and
couldn't fly? That would be a medical reason. So what if he was medically
diagnoses as being mentally incompetent to fly? I wasn't there, and I don't
know him, but it sounds like he was courageous individual who had something
snap that he couldn't consciously control (extreme PTSD presumably). I
won't presume to judge your fraternity's opinion of him, but if he did have
an extreme (now medically diagnosable) mental breakdown, he deserves thanks
for his 62, and pity for his medical condition after. Crappy deal all the
way around.

Tony

p.s.- wasn't it a well established phenomenon in Vietnam that pilots
generally went "candy-assed" when they got close to the end of their tour?
so much so that they were rotated out of Pack VI for their last five or ten?

YUP !


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

"Tony Volk" wrote in message
...
I'm curious here. Would it have been different if he broke his back and
couldn't fly? That would be a medical reason. So what if he was medically
diagnoses as being mentally incompetent to fly? I wasn't there, and I don't
know him, but it sounds like he was courageous individual who had something
snap that he couldn't consciously control (extreme PTSD presumably). I
won't presume to judge your fraternity's opinion of him, but if he did have
an extreme (now medically diagnosable) mental breakdown, he deserves thanks
for his 62, and pity for his medical condition after. Crappy deal all the
way around.

Why are we branching out into imaginary medical/psychiatric conditions? As far
as anybody knows, he was of sound mind and body at that time. What it pretty
much boils down to is why he chose to cease flying (which he did when he failed
to renew his flight physical) while his country was involved in a shooting war
half way around the world.

His priorities obviously did not include retaining his flying status and maybe
even volunteering for transition into a combat aircraft in use in Viet Nam and
maybe even subsequently volunteering to serve in Viet Nam. I suppose he thought
his Texas ANG experience uniquely qualified him to manage some unknown Alabama
politician's election campaign, and that was his first priority. Then, too,
maybe the streets of Montgomery or Birmingham being far safer than the streets
of Pleiku or Bien Hoa might have had something to do with it.

The fact remains that our shooting war was in Southeast Asia and he chose to
walk in the opposite direction. You can call that kind of behavior courageous,
but I can think of numerous other descriptive adjectives I might use, none of
which would even remotely be identified with courage.

George Z.

"George Z. Bush" wrote in message
...

snip


His priorities obviously did not include retaining his flying status and
maybe
even volunteering for transition into a combat aircraft in use in Viet Nam
and
maybe even subsequently volunteering to serve in Viet Nam.

He had already volunteered for Palace Alert duty--you were informed of this
before and admitted you had never heard of the program, much less the fact
that Bush did indeed volunteer for it. Your first false claim in this regard
can be chalked up to ignorance--repeated false claims just confirms your
lack of integrity.

I suppose he thought
his Texas ANG experience uniquely qualified him to manage some unknown
Alabama
politician's election campaign, and that was his first priority.

Gee, the idea that NG personnel consider their civilian occupations as being
their normal first priority--astounding!

Then, too,
maybe the streets of Montgomery or Birmingham being far safer than the
streets
of Pleiku or Bien Hoa might have had something to do with it.

Being as he had already volunteered for Palace Alert, you are just lying
agin.


The fact remains that our shooting war was in Southeast Asia and he chose
to
walk in the opposite direction. You can call that kind of behavior
courageous,
but I can think of numerous other descriptive adjectives I might use, none
of
which would even remotely be identified with courage.

Courage would require you to admit you were wrong in posting this nonsense
the first time you did so--integrity should have kept you from repeating
this crap again after admitting you had no idea that the program existed, or
that Bush had indeed volunteered for it. Seems like you are not exhibiting
much of either quality. If you want to attack Bush on the basis of differing
opinions regarding his policies, fine, that would be your right. But
attacking him based upon your own false assertions is just plain lying, pure
and simple.

Brooks


George Z.

On Wed, 4 Feb 2004 11:28:58 -0500, "George Z. Bush"
wrote:


"Tony Volk" wrote in message
...
I'm curious here. Would it have been different if he broke his back and
couldn't fly? That would be a medical reason. So what if he was medically
diagnoses as being mentally incompetent to fly? I wasn't there, and I don't
know him, but it sounds like he was courageous individual who had something
snap that he couldn't consciously control (extreme PTSD presumably). I
won't presume to judge your fraternity's opinion of him, but if he did have
an extreme (now medically diagnosable) mental breakdown, he deserves thanks
for his 62, and pity for his medical condition after. Crappy deal all the
way around.

Why are we branching out into imaginary medical/psychiatric conditions? As far
as anybody knows, he was of sound mind and body at that time. What it pretty
much boils down to is why he chose to cease flying (which he did when he failed
to renew his flight physical) while his country was involved in a shooting war
half way around the world.

His priorities obviously did not include retaining his flying status and maybe
even volunteering for transition into a combat aircraft in use in Viet Nam and
maybe even subsequently volunteering to serve in Viet Nam. I suppose he thought
his Texas ANG experience uniquely qualified him to manage some unknown Alabama
politician's election campaign, and that was his first priority. Then, too,
maybe the streets of Montgomery or Birmingham being far safer than the streets
of Pleiku or Bien Hoa might have had something to do with it.

The fact remains that our shooting war was in Southeast Asia and he chose to
walk in the opposite direction. You can call that kind of behavior courageous,
but I can think of numerous other descriptive adjectives I might use, none of
which would even remotely be identified with courage.

George Z.

You seemed to have dropped the ball here, George. We are talking about
a WW II pilot in Art Kramer's unit who was shot down and then refused
to fly. Your fixation (and associated errors) seems to be overwhelming
your judgement.

But, first there is no "renew your flight physical" in the military.
That applies to Class I/II/III for FAA license. If you are on flying
status in the military you take an annual flight physical. The
President did not "fail to renew" a physical.

The incident you refer to after four years of flying service including
UPT, operational qualification in the F-102 and achieving operational
alert status in the TANG was a request for four months detached duty
at Montgomery while working on a political campaign. The New York
Times has reported the corrected details of the events. Bush was
unable to meet commitments. He requested and received approval to make
up drill periods at a later time. This is standard ANG procedure.

He was current in a "combat aircraft in use in Viet Nam". The F-102
(including ANG crews) was deployed at Udorn, Danang and Tan Son Nhut
among other place.

So, follow the thread, contribute relevantly, get your facts straight,
and reduce the level of your personal agenda.






Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8

From: "George Z. Bush" am



"Tony Volk" wrote in message
...
I'm curious here. Would it have been different if he broke his back
and
couldn't fly? That would be a medical reason. So what if he was medically
diagnoses as being mentally incompetent to fly? I wasn't there, and I
don't
know him, but it sounds like he was courageous individual who had something
snap that he couldn't consciously control (extreme PTSD presumably). I
won't presume to judge your fraternity's opinion of him, but if he did have
an extreme (now medically diagnosable) mental breakdown, he deserves thanks
for his 62, and pity for his medical condition after. Crappy deal all the
way around.

Why are we branching out into imaginary medical/psychiatric conditions? As
far
as anybody knows, he was of sound mind and body at that time. What it pretty
much boils down to is why he chose to cease flying (which he did when he
failed
to renew his flight physical) while his country was involved in a shooting
war
half way around the world.

His priorities obviously did not include retaining his flying status and
maybe
even volunteering for transition into a combat aircraft in use in Viet Nam
and
maybe even subsequently volunteering to serve in Viet Nam. I suppose he
thought
his Texas ANG experience uniquely qualified him to manage some unknown
Alabama
politician's election campaign, and that was his first priority. Then, too,
maybe the streets of Montgomery or Birmingham being far safer than the
streets
of Pleiku or Bien Hoa might have had something to do with it.

The fact remains that our shooting war was in Southeast Asia and he chose to
walk in the opposite direction. You can call that kind of behavior
courageous,
but I can think of numerous other descriptive adjectives I might use, none of
which would even remotely be identified with courage.

George Z.

Clue me, George, how does a GI of company grade refuse a physical?

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

On Wed, 4 Feb 2004 10:54:05 -0500, "Tony Volk"
wrote:

p.s.- wasn't it a well established phenomenon in Vietnam that pilots
generally went "candy-assed" when they got close to the end of their tour?
so much so that they were rotated out of Pack VI for their last five or ten?

YUP !


Arthur Kramer

NOPE! You might want to read When Thunder Rolled for my description of
the last mission of my tour in which two of the seven flying from my
squadron were lost and I recovered back at Korat with ten pounds of
fuel left in the jet.

Statistically the most dangerous missions on a 100 mission tour were
the first ten and the last ten. The first because you were scared and
inexperienced, the last because there was a tendency to get
over-aggressive and feel a bit immortal. Many guys were trying to win
the war on their last couple before they completed and went home.

Lucky Ekman extended beyond his first 100 and got shot down on 132.
Jim Mitchell, my flight commander got shot down his second time on 99.
Karl Richter was shot down on 198 near the end of his 200. Many guys
with 100 North came back for more tours.

The practice of trying to keep guys off of the Pack VI schedule at the
end of the tour was to keep them alive, not because they "went
candy-assed."

I'm biting my tongue to keep from pulling an Art here and asking the
source of your information.



Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8