This NG is turning

Subject: This NG is turning
From: Ed Rasimus
Date: 9/13/2004 8:24 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:


"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...

Speaking of drivel would you tell us all about your combat experiences?

And, what exactly would you like to know about them, Art?



Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
"Phantom Flights, Bangkok Nights"
Both from Smithsonian Books
***www.thunderchief.org


You've already told us about your medals Ed. Well done. Your country is proud
of you.


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

Ahh, more wisdom from the

"If you didn't ride around in B-26s in the ETO you don't know jack about
[Brain surgery, opinion polling, political science, economics, whatever]"
gasbag.

I can only imagine- it must physically hurt to be so stupid AND ignorant
simultaneously.

Steve Swartz




"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...
Subject: This NG is turning
From: "Jack G"
Date: 9/12/2004 4:48 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: Cf51d.1487$bj2.680@trnddc08

Are those percentages derived from actual numbers or just crude estimates?
If you can show the numbers used in your calculations I'll believe you.
Otherwise this gets the same regard as the other drivel you post here.

Jack G.



Speaking of drivel would you tell us all about your combat experiences?


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

On 12 Sep 2004 23:54:10 GMT, (ArtKramr) wrote:

Are those percentages derived from actual numbers or just crude estimates?
If you can show the numbers used in your calculations I'll believe you.
Otherwise this gets the same regard as the other drivel you post here.

Jack G.



Speaking of drivel would you tell us all about your combat experiences?

You need combat experience to calculate percentages? What in the
hell are you talking about?

--
"The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability
of the human mind to correlate all its contents." - H.P. Lovecraft

Like any good democrat (oxymoron) Art just assumes he gets to vote as many
times as he hits the return key . . .

Steve Swartz

"Jack G" wrote in message
news:Cf51d.1487$bj2.680@trnddc08...
Are those percentages derived from actual numbers or just crude estimates?
If you can show the numbers used in your calculations I'll believe you.
Otherwise this gets the same regard as the other drivel you post here.

Jack G.


"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...
A while ago the posts here were 95% pro war, pro neocon. Today they at
least
60% anti-war and anti Bush administration. Things are looking up.Kerry
may
take
the day after all.


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

On 12 Sep 2004 23:39:39 GMT,
ArtKramr wrote:
A while ago the posts here were 95% pro war, pro neocon. Today they at least
60% anti-war and anti Bush administration. Things are looking up.Kerry may take
the day after all.



hmm, about 3/10 on the troll meter...

Subject: This NG is turning
From: walt moffett
Date: 9/12/2004 4:49 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

On 12 Sep 2004 23:39:39 GMT,
ArtKramr wrote:
A while ago the posts here were 95% pro war, pro neocon. Today they at
least
60% anti-war and anti Bush administration. Things are looking up.Kerry may
take
the day after all.



hmm, about 3/10 on the troll meter...



Only by Neocon standards.


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 in message
...
A while ago the posts here were 95% pro war, pro neocon. Today they at
least
60% anti-war and anti Bush administration. Things are looking up.Kerry may
take
the day after all.


Arthur Kramer

I keep hoping it will turn out to about military aviation. You aren't
helping much. Too bad! You could have been a contender.

Tex Houston

Yep, this group is turning alright. Years ago you could guarantee reasoned
questions & answers on military aviation topics. Seems to be 90% off-topic (at
a very rough non-scientific guess).

Any chance of some on-topic chat?

Duncan

DunxC wrote:
Yep, this group is turning alright. Years ago you could guarantee reasoned
questions & answers on military aviation topics. Seems to be 90% off-topic (at
a very rough non-scientific guess).

Any chance of some on-topic chat?

I remember reading stories about the air war in WWI, and I always wondered why
Fokker included a third wing on that unique three-winger fighter the Germans
used and why. I don't believe any other aircraft manufacturer built a line
model with three wings, but I could be wrong about that.

Comments?

George Z.

PS - Like you, Duncan, I'm tired of having to wade through so much seasonal
political bull**** in RAM in order to read of things military aviation. In the
interests of subject purity, I've given up even commenting on such impure
intrusions on our "raison d'etre" and encourage others to follow my lead. Let's
just ignore that stuff when it shows up and limit our responses to a simple
two-letter "OT" if we feel obliged to say anything at all and then move on.
Most of us have made up our minds already anyway, so look at all the bandwidth
we'll be able to save.

George Z. Bush wrote:

I remember reading stories about the air war in WWI, and I always wondered why
Fokker included a third wing on that unique three-winger fighter the Germans
used and why. I don't believe any other aircraft manufacturer built a line
model with three wings, but I could be wrong about that.

Probably to increase wing area and still maintain a small profile. They
are tiny planes even when compared to the small size of the Sopwith Pup
and Camel. Sopwith came out with a 3-decker prior to the Fokker, but
neither of them remained in service very long. The DR1 was mainly active
between Nov 1917 and May 1918 and of the 320 or so made a large number
crashed due to structural failures. They sure look cute in the flesh
though.

Out of curiosity, did you ever fly the C-46 at all, and if so, how did
it compare to the C-47? I've often wondered what the difference in run
length for take offs and landings was.

Dave.