Instructors: is no combat better?

"Howard Berkowitz" wrote in message
...
In article ,
(ArtKramr) wrote:

Subject: Instructors: is no combat better?
From: Howard Berkowitz
Date: 3/9/04 2:50 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

In article , "Kevin Brooks"
wrote:

"Howard Berkowitz" wrote in message
...


Seriously, would anyone care to speculate that if aircraft gunner
was
still a tactically useful skill, how much virtual reality simulator
time
(e.g., in at least a 3-axis-of-motion device) would a gunner get
before
going to a combat unit? Aggressor simulators only, or perhaps a
few
pilots that have flown the aggressor ship manipulating the target?

I suspect temperature, noise, fumes, etc. would all be part of the
simulator.

Heck, they used "simulators" of a sort like that during WWII. My dad,
who
was a gunner on a B-29, remembers standing in the back of a truck
that
drove
along while the trainee took shots at model aircraft.


Right. But let's assume full modern simulator capability. What would
that have done for combat effectiveness? A truck, for example, is
going
to be "flying" much more straight and level, there won't be the noise
of
multiple defensive guns or the sound of your plane being hit, assorted
fumes, cold, etc. The model plane is probably not being controlled by
one of the best of pilots (or their doppelganger in an intelligent
simulator).


The problem with simulators is that no one ever died in one.


How is a dead gunner that can't fly a mission an advantage? Not getting
killed strikes me more as an advantage than a problem. For example, the
motivation for Top Gun was that a fighter pilot would be far more likely
to survive and win if he could get through his first five engagements --
so the training goal was to give him the equivalent five in expensive,
realistic training -- but not as expensive as pilots.

It's also a little marginal to say no one ever died. I agree not
literally, but physiological measurements show that crashing in a
realistic flight simulator is extremely stressful -- and really drives
home the lesson of what one did wrong. In the Army's field training with
the MILES "laser-tag-on-steroids-system", it's sufficiently realistic
that there have had to be medical intervention to deal with the stress
-- and counseling that brought a far better soldier to a duty unit.

Personally, I have substantial experience with advanced medical
simulators. Believe me, when a medical student, resident, or practicing
physician sees how their actions would just have killed someone, it's an
incredibly strong learning reinforcement.

Saw a similar situation during a division Warfighter exercise, embedded into
a V Corps WFX. Our division tactical CP engineer rep had to make a quick
recommendation regarding an artillery shoot/don't shoot query that concerned
a report of mechanized units crossing a float bridge. He checked our digital
engineer SITREP and gave a thumbs-up for the shoot. Unfortunately, the unit
that was crossing was a blue unit ( a separate armored brigade that had been
chopped to us the evening before, and was not too good at keeping us abreast
of their activities). They put a multi-battalion fire-for-effect on the
bridge and killed a lot of blues. Even though it was only electrons that
ended up "dying", the officer in question took it rather hard, being a
conscientious sort of guy. And yeah, the adrenaline can get to pumping
during a high paced sim.

Brooks

"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...
Subject: Instructors: is no combat better?
From: Howard Berkowitz
Date: 3/9/04 1:52 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

In article ,
(ArtKramr) wrote:

Subject: Instructors: is no combat better?
From: "Tarver Engineering"
Date: 3/9/04 10:33 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:


"Seagram" wrote in message
...
Ok tribe members, its time to cast your vote. Who wants Art off the
island

Nice thread Art, don't let the bottom feeders troll you.

Excellent signal, to all that participated.


I made it through WW II . There is no way the bottom feeders stand a
chance,
especially the wannabee bottom feeders. But then again all the
wannabees
are
bottom feeders.


Catfish have a biologically useful role. Did you mean lawyers?


Without lawyers there would be no rule of law. There would be no equal;
protection under the law. There would be no courts and no constitution.

Be careful what you wish for lest you get it, And what you seem to be
wishing
for can be the end of freedom as we know it. Those who undermine the
lawyers
are undermining the law. And they have agendas that are well worth
examining.
No I am not a lawyer. Be watchful. Justice Thomas has been making noises
that
may well lead to overturning the 14th amendment. A disaster. Yup. You hit
a
nerve.

Err..how the heck does the Supreme Court overturn a *constitutional
amendment*?! The SC rules on matters *using* the constitution, including its
amendments--it has no authority to "overturn" or toss out any amendment of
the constitution. Sounds like someone is letting his political leanings
prejudice his comments.

Brooks



Arthur Kramer

Subject: Instructors: is no combat better?
From: Howard Berkowitz
Date: 3/9/04 5:21 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

In article ,
(ArtKramr) wrote:

Subject: Instructors: is no combat better?
From: Howard Berkowitz
Date: 3/9/04 4:06 PM Pacific Standard Time

Justice Thomas has not exactly been the spiritual or intellectual leader
of the Court.

Ah Howard your understatement is poetic.(grin)

Let us count our blessings. You may remember the failed nomination of
Harold Carswell. In general, there were less ideological objections to
him than a general realization he wasn't too bright.

Sen. Roman Hruska (R-Neb) complained in one speech "There are a lot of
mediocre people in this country. Don't they deserve representation too?"

Nebraska didn't have a monopoly on that sort of insight. The
then-senator from my own state, the great Commonwealth of Virginia, Bill
Scott (R), called a press conference to deny allegations he was the
dumbest man in the Senate.


The mind boggles. (sigh)



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

Subject: Instructors: is no combat better?
From: Howard Berkowitz
Date: 3/9/04 5:15 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

In article ,
(ArtKramr) wrote:

Subject: Instructors: is no combat better?
From: Howard Berkowitz
Date: 3/9/04 3:54 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:


e.

As far as saying anything negative, I really don't want to go back into
the archives, but I'm fairly certain you sounded at least dubious about
how someone could rise to O-6 without combat, and suggested that he
should have sought it out.


I would have sought it out. wouldn't you have as well?


Let's say I had been in service.. My answer is probably not, and
thoughtfully, for the good of my country. My strongest skills are in
C3I -- I'm trained as both a network architect and as a strategic
intelligence analyst. Being able to combine the two helped, for example,
when I consulted on design of command posts at the joint command level.

As I've said before, some of my work involved personnel sensors for Viet
Nam. If some of the devices I worked on variously could tell a strike
pilot where troops were located under jungle canopy, I might save quite
a few pilots from flak traps. We worked on a system that was just in
prototype, but potentially could let you line up "peaceful" villagers
and find out which ones had recently handled Soviet-bloc weapons -- and
perhaps get them out of circulation before they ambushed you.

So am I going to do more good for my country in a cockpit or in a
laboratory? Quite probably the latter.


Guess you are right. But I was an 18 year old kid and there was a war on and
there way no way in hell I was going to miss it no matter what my
qualifications were, You are obviously far more thoughtful and analytical than
I was. I wanted to go to war and nothing in hell was going to stop me. But I
guess that is theway we all were when we were 18. (sigh)


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

Thank you for your interesting post. And thank you for telling your
story
without flames, insults or sarcasm. I appreciate that.
In other words, Kramer, allow me to spell it out for ya. What the
poster is alluding to above is that bush pilots are among the
thousands of brave aviators whom you have categorically insulted
as "cowards."

I'll put it in my own words. Art, I sincerely respect and appreciate
the sacrifice you made for freedom. I literally get Goosebumps thinking
about the sacrifice of W.W.II veterans. But I feel the same way about some
other vets from other wars, and for people who've stood up to injustice, and
for children who've blossomed despite mistreatment, to parents who
sacrificed everything for their children's welfare, and to people who are
devoted to helping others. Indeed, the most heroic people I've ever heard
about were NOT combat vets (just about every religious figure comes to mind
as examples, and I think children and mothers have shown me the greatest
courage). Combat is only one test of men, and an imperfect one at that.
I'll stop preaching about now, as I don't have all the answers, and I'm
not a combat veteran myself (although I have put my life in harm's way for
others). The point of my post was: a) to mention that in WWII, non-combat
instructors were highly valued in some instances (talking to my father
tonight, he said my granddad Lancasters later in the war, fighters earlier-
my granddad could really fly 'em all!!), b) through his years of service my
grandfather made a courageous and valuable contribution to the freedom of
the world, and c) Art, if you truly believe that heroism isn't limited to
combat, you might want to examine the kind of language you use (e.g., the
respect for a non-combat instructor). There was no flame, sarcasm or insult
designed into my post, only a desire to illustrate that you don't have to
serve in combat to show courage deserving of, and receiving, respect. In my
limited opinion, courage is neither necessarily required for or equated with
combat service (the type-writer guy in Saving Private Ryan serves as a
fictitious example). Sincerely,

Tony

In article ,
"Kevin Brooks" writes:

"Howard Berkowitz" wrote in message
...
Seriously, would anyone care to speculate that if aircraft gunner was
still a tactically useful skill, how much virtual reality simulator time
(e.g., in at least a 3-axis-of-motion device) would a gunner get before
going to a combat unit? Aggressor simulators only, or perhaps a few
pilots that have flown the aggressor ship manipulating the target?

I suspect temperature, noise, fumes, etc. would all be part of the
simulator.

Heck, they used "simulators" of a sort like that during WWII. My dad, who
was a gunner on a B-29, remembers standing in the back of a truck that drove
along while the trainee took shots at model aircraft.

Somebody from the Film Industry (Might have been Disney) developed a
prejection system using a hemispherical dome with a turret inside.
They had some sort of system to measure tracking errors.

And then, there was Operation Pinball, the ultimate simulator. Real
bombers with real turrets, but the .50 cals have been replaced with
..30 cals firing frangible (break up on impact) bullets. The targets
are specially armored P-63s that make passes on the student gunner's
airplane. There are acoustic sensors in the P-63s that can hear the
impact of the bullets on the skin for measuring the number of hits.

--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster

(ArtKramr) wrote:

Subject: Instructors: is no combat better?

--cut--

From: "Tony Volk" I can offer you proof that many
pilots thought at least one non-combat instructor was (to quote one letter)
"worth [his] weight in gold". Regards,

Tony Volk


Thank you for your interesting post. And thank you for telling your story
without flames, insults or sarcasm. I appreciate that.

Arthur Kramer


Art, have you noticed the large number of credible posters who
seem to be opposing you here?...doesn't it give you pause?...I
think that it should. It's quite likely that they're not all
wrong and that you're right. You probably should rethink your
position.
--

-Gord.

(Peter Stickney) wrote:

And then, there was Operation Pinball, the ultimate simulator. Real
bombers with real turrets, but the .50 cals have been replaced with
.30 cals firing frangible (break up on impact) bullets. The targets
are specially armored P-63s that make passes on the student gunner's
airplane. There are acoustic sensors in the P-63s that can hear the
impact of the bullets on the skin for measuring the number of hits.

The "Real Man's Paintball?"
--

-Gord.

In article , (Peter
Stickney) wrote:

In article ,
"Kevin Brooks" writes:

"Howard Berkowitz" wrote in message
...
Seriously, would anyone care to speculate that if aircraft gunner was
still a tactically useful skill, how much virtual reality simulator
time
(e.g., in at least a 3-axis-of-motion device) would a gunner get
before
going to a combat unit? Aggressor simulators only, or perhaps a few
pilots that have flown the aggressor ship manipulating the target?

I suspect temperature, noise, fumes, etc. would all be part of the
simulator.

Heck, they used "simulators" of a sort like that during WWII. My dad,
who
was a gunner on a B-29, remembers standing in the back of a truck that
drove
along while the trainee took shots at model aircraft.

Somebody from the Film Industry (Might have been Disney) developed a
prejection system using a hemispherical dome with a turret inside.
They had some sort of system to measure tracking errors.

And then, there was Operation Pinball, the ultimate simulator. Real
bombers with real turrets, but the .50 cals have been replaced with
.30 cals firing frangible (break up on impact) bullets. The targets
are specially armored P-63s that make passes on the student gunner's
airplane. There are acoustic sensors in the P-63s that can hear the
impact of the bullets on the skin for measuring the number of hits.


That is _very_ realistic. I think, all in all, we could do it more
cheaply with virtual reality. Operation Pinball could do G-forces
better, although a simulation platform with multiple degree of freedom
movement can get awfully close.

BUFDRVR:

You are being too conservative with your reply. I think your
characterization is shared by many- Art has 2 main worldviews:

1) "I was there when the U.S. Made Europe Safe For Socialism therefore I Am
An Expert In Everything"

and

2) "If You Weren't There You Have No Right To An Opinion On Anything"

The sad thing is, many of his generation are not as greedy, foolish, nor
self centered as he is. He doesn't realize just how irrational and self
absorbed he is. Johari Window strikes again. Guess that comes with a
draft. You certainly pick up the Good, Bad, adn Ugly in a draft . . .

Steve Swartz



"BUFDRVR" wrote in message
...
And who have I ever called a coward?

To summerize: everyone who never participated in the European Theater
from
1943-1945.

You couldn't be more vague, non- commital and evasive even if your life
depended on it. I hope you fly better than you attack..


Uhh, that wasn't an attack...it was a slight exaggeration of my perception
of
your attitude. You have called *many* people cowards on this group, both
by
generalization and personally.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it
harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"