![]() |
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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Raymond Chuang wrote:
"ville terminale" wrote in message om... of course they are nonsense. an american pilot was probably 5 times as good as the best russian pilot. The Russian pilots acquited themselves well flying the MiG-15 in combat over Korea but the fact they couldn't communicate in Russian and the problem of the MiG-15 suffering from yaw instability problems above Mach 0.87 limited the success of the plane. Indeed, a couple of Russian pilots tried to outdive the F-86 but the MiG-15 ended up breaking up in the air instead. The US forces were in Korea as a part of the United nations peace keeping forces defending South Korea. Why were there Russian pilots flying for North Korea? Why was Russia, still a member of the UN, clandestinely fighting against the UN? -- Rostyk |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The US forces were in Korea as a part of the United nations peace
keeping forces defending South Korea. Why were there Russian pilots flying for North Korea? Why was Russia, still a member of the UN, clandestinely fighting against the UN? -- Rostyk Because according to North Korean and Soviet history, it was they who were defending DRPK against those evil South Korea, US, and UN invaders, who started the war by first invading North Korea ![]() It is that same history, that allowed Soviet pilots to shoot down each of our F-86s, multiple times each, to achieve their incredible kill numbers. Ron Tanker 65, C-54E (DC-4) |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
If you knew your history, or were around at the time, you'd know without being
told that the only reason the US was in that "police action" at all was that the Soviet Union, during those relatively early UN Security Council days, took a walk during one of their political snits when the subject came up for discussion. The SC, in their absence, approved UN intervention in behalf of South Korea; had the Soviet ambassador been present during that SC discussion, they could easily (and undoubtedly would have) vetoed it, since they had the right to do that as all original members of the Security Council could. So, to answer your question, they fought in behalf of North Korea because North Korea was one of their client states to whom they furnished all kinds of military equipment and supplies, as well as the training in their use. They fought for the NKs because they did not want the world to think their MIG aircraft, in the hands of relatively green NK pilots, couldn't be competitive with US military equipment. If they could have turned back the clock, there wouldn't even have been a war, because they'd have prevented it from happening. That's it, in a nutshell. George Z. "Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj" wrote in message ... Raymond Chuang wrote: "ville terminale" wrote in message om... of course they are nonsense. an american pilot was probably 5 times as good as the best russian pilot. The Russian pilots acquited themselves well flying the MiG-15 in combat over Korea but the fact they couldn't communicate in Russian and the problem of the MiG-15 suffering from yaw instability problems above Mach 0.87 limited the success of the plane. Indeed, a couple of Russian pilots tried to outdive the F-86 but the MiG-15 ended up breaking up in the air instead. The US forces were in Korea as a part of the United nations peace keeping forces defending South Korea. Why were there Russian pilots flying for North Korea? Why was Russia, still a member of the UN, clandestinely fighting against the UN? -- Rostyk |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Why was Russia, still a member of the UN, clandestinely fighting against the UN? Russia had walked out of the Security Council some time prior to the North Korean invasion of the south. That (and only that) made possible the UN's decision to send troops to Korea. Otherwise Russia would have exercised its veto. Given that the war had been started--literally--behind its back, Russia presumably felt no obligation to abide by the UN's decision, any more than China did. ("Communist China" in 1950 was not a member of the UN, Security Council or otherwise. The Chinese seat was held by "Free China" aka Taiwan, when Chiang Kai-shek and the KMT had removed themselves the previous year.) Russia never again made the mistake of walking out on the Security Council. all the best -- Dan Ford email: (requires authentication) see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
George Z. Bush wrote:
If you knew your history, or were around at the time, you'd know without being told that the only reason the US was in that "police action" at all was that the Soviet Union, during those relatively early UN Security Council days, took a walk during one of their political snits when the subject came up for discussion. The SC, in their absence, approved UN intervention in behalf of South Korea; had the Soviet ambassador been present during that SC discussion, they could easily (and undoubtedly would have) vetoed it, since they had the right to do that as all original members of the Security Council could. Common knowledge. So, to answer your question, they fought in behalf of North Korea because North Korea was one of their client states to whom they furnished all kinds of military equipment and supplies, as well as the training in their use. They fought for the NKs because they did not want the world to think their MIG aircraft, in the hands of relatively green NK pilots, couldn't be competitive with US military equipment. If they could have turned back the clock, there wouldn't even have been a war, because they'd have prevented it from happening. That's it, in a nutshell. George Z. So you explain, interpret, this as an expression of simple commercial interests ? ;-) |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj wrote:
George Z. Bush wrote: If you knew your history, or were around at the time, you'd know without being told that the only reason the US was in that "police action" at all was that the Soviet Union, during those relatively early UN Security Council days, took a walk during one of their political snits when the subject came up for discussion. The SC, in their absence, approved UN intervention in behalf of South Korea; had the Soviet ambassador been present during that SC discussion, they could easily (and undoubtedly would have) vetoed it, since they had the right to do that as all original members of the Security Council could. Common knowledge. So, to answer your question, they fought in behalf of North Korea because North Korea was one of their client states to whom they furnished all kinds of military equipment and supplies, as well as the training in their use. They fought for the NKs because they did not want the world to think their MIG aircraft, in the hands of relatively green NK pilots, couldn't be competitive with US military equipment. If they could have turned back the clock, there wouldn't even have been a war, because they'd have prevented it from happening. That's it, in a nutshell. George Z. So you explain, interpret, this as an expression of simple commercial interests ? ;-) Only in part. I thought it obvious that everybody would assume that they would stand up for their ideological bedfellows, and so I didn't think that part of it was worth mentioning. (^-^)))) George Z. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
"George Z. Bush" writes: If you knew your history, or were around at the time, you'd know without being told that the only reason the US was in that "police action" at all was that the Soviet Union, during those relatively early UN Security Council days, took a walk during one of their political snits when the subject came up for discussion. The SC, in their absence, approved UN intervention in behalf of South Korea; had the Soviet ambassador been present during that SC discussion, they could easily (and undoubtedly would have) vetoed it, since they had the right to do that as all original members of the Security Council could. That's not entirely so, G.Z. U.S. troops moved from Japan to Korea before the U.N. debates, and U.S.A.F. airplanes were shooting down airplanes and dropping bombs pretty much from Day One. The North Koreans crossed teh 38th Parellel on June 24, 1950, The U.S. comiited Air and Naval forces to supporting the ROK Army on Jume 26. The U.N. Resolution authorizing force was passed on the evening of June 27. (Remember, we're talking about MacArthur, here.) So, to answer your question, they fought in behalf of North Korea because North Korea was one of their client states to whom they furnished all kinds of military equipment and supplies, as well as the training in their use. They fought for the NKs because they did not want the world to think their MIG aircraft, in the hands of relatively green NK pilots, couldn't be competitive with US military equipment. If they could have turned back the clock, there wouldn't even have been a war, because they'd have prevented it from happening. That's it, in a nutshell. Well, the NKPA Air Force dissolved in the first month. The MiGs that first appeared were Soviet, flown by Soviet Pilots. (151st Guards Fighter Aviation Division) They first appeared in November, 1950, about 3 weeks after the U.N. had reached, and the Chinese crossed the Yalu. The Chinese were getting pretty badly beaten up by U.S. tactical airpower, which consisted of F-80s, F-51s, and B-26s (The Douglas ones) at that time. None of them could, however, compete with the MiGs. The Chinese didn't start flying their own MiGs in combat until late 1951. The North Koreans didn't start flying theirs until they got some pilots trained in late 1952 - whether any made it into combat is a matter of some dispute. Now, mind you, they _did_ go to great lengths to hide their involvement. -- Pete Stickney A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many bad measures. -- Daniel Webster |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Cub Driver wrote in message . ..
Why was Russia, still a member of the UN, clandestinely fighting against the UN? Russia had walked out of the Security Council some time prior to the North Korean invasion of the south. That (and only that) made possible the UN's decision to send troops to Korea. Otherwise Russia would have exercised its veto. Given that the war had been started--literally--behind its back, Russia presumably felt no obligation to abide by the UN's decision, any more than China did. The Soviets (not the Russians to be precise) walked out of the Security Council thinking that the US would not be able to push through a vote. While many historians had thought that the Soviets were reluctant supporters duped by a unruly client, the declassified archives show otherwise. The Soviets were doing their share of instigating and were quite active in supporting the North Korean plans to start a conventional attack on the South. The Korean War was certainly not started behind Stalin's back. Han |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
![]() (Remember, we're talking about MacArthur, here.) Actually, we're talking about Harry Truman. MacArthur did not move without instructions from Washington, MacArthur got his orders on Monday morning, Tokyo time (Sunday evenign in Washington). As previously noted, Russia had walked out of the Security Council BEFORE the invasion (because of an unrelated argument over the seating of "Communist China"). The vote on the intervention was 7-1, with Yugoslavia voting against. Since Yugoslavia was not a permanent member, it did not have the veto. Had Russia not walked out, as a permanent member, it could have vetoed the "police action". It is amazing how people can rewrite history for buttress their beliefs. (This of course is not to say that Truman would not have intervened on his own. But MacArthur had neither the authority nor the philosophy that would have enabled him to join battle in Korea without the president's direction. To suggest so is to misunderstand both men.) all the best -- Dan Ford email: (requires authentication) see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Cub Driver wrote:
[political rant snipped] It is amazing how people can rewrite history for buttress their beliefs. Same goes for how people can ignore the truth and attack the messenger to buttress their beliefs, or trot out the ol' "killfile" threat... KILLFILE (To the tune: "Rawhide") Losin’, losin’, losin’, Trolls we’re disapprovin', Keep them trolls a-movin', killfile. Don't try to understand 'em, Extinguish fires, don’t fan them. Soon you'll see quiet far and wide. You’ll miss out on their baitin', Their arguin’ and ravin', They’re waitin' to be in your killfile. Move 'em in, turn ‘em off, Turn ‘em off, move 'em in, Move 'em in, turn ‘em off, killfile! Tune 'em out, put 'em in, Put 'em in, tune 'em out, Tune 'em out, put 'em in killfiles! Trollin', trollin', trollin', Killfiles all are swollen, Keep them filters growin', killfile. Wherever trolls should blather, Ignore ‘em altogether, Try it, you’ll have some peace and quiet. The things that you’ll be missin', The moanin’ and the ****in', Are gone if you just kiss ‘em goodbye. Move 'em in, turn ‘em off, Turn ‘em off, move 'em in, Move 'em in, turn ‘em off, killfile! Tune 'em out, put 'em in, Put 'em in, tune 'em out, Tune 'em out, put 'em in killfiles! |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
Russian Air Force Woes - Time to start again? | Peter Kemp | Military Aviation | 31 | February 21st 04 02:10 AM |
[OT] USA - TSA Obstructing Armed Pilots? | No Spam! | Military Aviation | 120 | January 27th 04 10:19 AM |
US kill loss ratio versus Russian pilots in Korean War? | Rats | Military Aviation | 21 | January 26th 04 08:56 AM |
RUSSIAN WAR PLANES IN ASIA | James | Military Aviation | 2 | October 1st 03 11:25 PM |