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 |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 10:31:17 -0500, Alan Minyard
wrote: And, apparently, all fighter types have egos at least ten orders of magnitude greater than either their abilities or their egos. Al Minyard My ego is not bigger than my ego. It seems to hover around the same size, no matter which angle I view it from. As for my abilities, my ego is unrelated. Show me a humble fighter pilot and I'll show you a loser. Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" Smithsonian Institution Press ISBN #1-58834-103-8 |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 10:28:48 -0500, Alan Minyard
wrote: On Wed, 09 Jun 2004 10:09:59 -0600, Ed Rasimus wrote: I used to tell the new guys in my squadron that they flew fighters. They would be a "Fighter Pilot" when someone else told them they were. Until then, they were authorized to say they "fly fighters." With all due respect, fighter pilots are no more special than any other Serviceman. The OOD of a nuclear submarine has far more responsibility than some guy flying around. Being a "fighter pilot" is no more (or less) deserving of respect than a grunt Company Commander, a tanker pilot. or a Surface Warfare OOD. The self appointed "gods" that fighter types make of themselves only serves to demean all Servicemen, including themselves. Gimme a break. Taking pride in your training and specialization in no way demeans someone else. Pride is not a zero-sum game. You might also want to quickly review the distinction between "authority" and "responsibility". If as I assume, OOD means Officer of the Deck, then he/she only has authority to act on behalf of the ship's Captain who bears the responsibility. Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" Smithsonian Institution Press ISBN #1-58834-103-8 |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 15:30:22 GMT, Jack wrote:
Ed Rasimus wrote: Well, you do know of course, that Fighter Pilots are indeed "the chosen few." How could it be otherwise? I have mucho respect for former Thud drivers, as well as Jollys and Sandys. But, I often wonder why it is that the Thud drivers are the ones who insist on their own superiority in such an annoying manner? They aren't the only military units that have been misused and abused, that's for sure. They just seem to whine about it longer and louder (even worse than those F-4 blowhards). I appreciate your respect. I also note, for the record, that I have four times as much F-4 time (C, D & E) as I do F-105 time and almost twice as much F-4 combat time as F-105 combat. I don't insist on my own superiority at all. I simply have a strong, positive self-image. You might want to check When Thunder Rolled out at your local library to read about the development of that self-image. If it's true, as I suspect, that a higher percentage of 105 pukes shot down (than Sandys or Jollys) survived to become POWs, that could be perceived as an advantage, though perhaps not more highly deserved. Exposure to threat leads to losses. More exposure, more losses. It doesn't equate with better or lesser capability or skill. As always, Sandys and Jollys drink for free around here. Those whose airplanes are propelled by many very small enclosed rotating blades, without the use of a few very large ones, should bring cash. Sandys and Jollys drink for free here as well. Proud to buy top shelf for them any time. Just put away that damn stencil and green spray can. Jack (SEA FAC) Ed, peace-time FAC/ALO, 2d Bde, 4th ID(Mech). Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" Smithsonian Institution Press ISBN #1-58834-103-8 |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Al wrote:
And, apparently, all fighter types have egos at least ten orders of magnitude greater than either their abilities or their egos. Ever meet a SAC StanEval Flight Examiner, Light Bird or Full Bull, from the "olden" days? or An Airborne 2LT just out of jump school or A Rookie Highway Patrol Trooper or A very good "Lady of the Evening" Just an EGO thing. While I liked to crew with pilots who had "A silent air of confidence". An ego was better than a WIMP if there was no option. Oxmoron1 MFE |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Ed:
Thanks for clearing all that up. I don't understand "BTW, you still trying to scrub those green footprints off your back-side?" Jim Thomas Ed Rasimus wrote in message news Were recce pilots who flew "alone and unarmed" into North Vietnam in RF-101s, and became the first POWs, pukes? Or their later RF-4 brothers? Well, other than the hyperbole regarding "became the first POWs", you make a point. Ev Alvarez and the guys who were early internees were mostly tactical fighter types. We don't want to get into Kramerism here regarding combat versus non-combat folks who through no fault of their own had less than a total "opportunity to excel". Were "Trash Haulers" who landed their C-130s and C-123s into places like Khe Son pukes? I like to reserve the appellation for guys who wouldn't give a buddy a hop in their dead-head flight back to Naha, because the residual fuel in the tank of the motor-bike they bought constituted "hazardous cargo", hence no pax. Or the transport crews who scheduled their in-theater rotations over the end of the month to get two months credit for "combat pay" and tax exclusion. Were the Misty Facs pukes? I correspond regularly with Don Sheppard. As you know, the Mistys included guys like Bud Day. They are Fighter Pilots. Were B-52 pilots who flew their Buffs over Hanoi during Linebacker pukes? Lots of BUFF-Rats show up at Reunions each year. Highly regarded, especially by the ex-cons who had a front line seat for the show. Were the Jolly Greens pukes? Or the Sandys that covered for them? By now, you're getting tedious. You know of course that the Recce-puke, trash-puke, etc. are all terms of endearment. Hang around a club stag bar for whatever type and you'll hear the other types called "xxxx-pukes." BTW, you still trying to scrub those green footprints off your back-side? Or are the only "pukes" those "fighter pilots" who need to feel that they are the chosen few. Well, you do know of course, that Fighter Pilots are indeed "the chosen few." How could it be otherwise? |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Ed Rasimus wrote in message news:
You said you were a Sandy and spent a lot of time around JG folks. If you were in a stag bar with JG guys you should have had the opportunity to either participate in or become the victim of their custom of spray-painting Jolly Green Giant footprints on the naked posterior of those who visited their lair. To tell you the truth, I never heard of this being done at Udorn (1967). Must have started after the Jollys and Sandies moved to Nakhom Phanom. Jim Thomas |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
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 |
Boeing Boondoggle | Larry Dighera | Military Aviation | 77 | September 15th 04 02:39 AM |
us air force us air force academy us air force bases air force museum us us air force rank us air force reserve adfunk | Jehad Internet | Military Aviation | 0 | February 7th 04 04:24 AM |
[OT] USA - TSA Obstructing Armed Pilots? | No Spam! | Military Aviation | 120 | January 27th 04 10:19 AM |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |