A Wake Up Call From Luke AFB

"Clark" wrote in message
...
"Peter R." wrote in
:

On 7/10/2007 2:20:06 PM, Clark wrote:

I told you that I wouldn't type what I'm thinking. Why do you ask? Think
I'll change my mind?

Too proud to admit you made a mistake, eh?

Peter!

SIWTSDS.

"Peter R." wrote in message
...
On 7/10/2007 2:20:06 PM, Clark wrote:

I told you that I wouldn't type what I'm thinking. Why do you ask? Think
I'll change my mind?

Too proud to admit you made a mistake, eh?


Hey Peter!

Pot, Kettle...

Recently, Matt Barrow posted:

Okay! What I took his two statements in conflict to mean was "Navy"
and "Vietnam vet".

That makes no sense whatsoever. First of all, that is _one_ statement, not
two. And, there are plenty of Navy vets who served in Vietnam.

My bad!

Indeed! ;-)

Yet, as a few others have pointed out, unless you're into aviation in
some way, the Missing Man Formation would be totally meaningless,
regardless of what non-aviation branch you were in.

To them, it's just a bunch of planes flying close together.

Well, that's why I posed it as a question, not a statement of fact. ;-)

From my perspective, anyone old enough to have served in Vietnam, vetran
or otherwise, should be rather familiar with formation flybys (it's not
clear that the Missing Man was executed at the time). If there isn't an
air show going on, it would be the first thing that would occur to me.
And, given the number of casualties in the Vietnam conflict, I would have
thought that any vet would have had many opportunities to witness such a
flyby. But, then, that's my perspective and not a matter of fact, ergo,
the question.

Neil

Recently, Matt Barrow posted:

Your nature is to presumption and malice. How 'bout that. One thing
about presumptuousness is that it often hides ignorance (not naiveté,
in this case), such as assuming that all vets understand flyovers. In
the other case, it shows a tremendous ignorance (or possibly just
naiveté) regarding Navy action in Vietnam.

Talk about presumption and ignorance... why would you extract *anything*
regarding "Navy action in Vietnam" from the original question? It makes no
sense whatsoever.

Just for your edification, one of my closest friends served in the Navy in
Vietnam. And, who could forget the whole "Swiftboat" business, or the F4s
and other Navy aircraft that were carrier-based, not to mention the fleet
stationed there? It would be kind of hard *not* to know of Navy action in
Vietnam unless you were born since then and lived in an opaque bubble.

Face it, Matt, you went off on a bizarre tangent that only underscores
your misreading of the original question.

Neil

Matt Barrow writes:

So snarl at the reader, not the poster: real good.

Better still, keep to the topic, and skip the personal attacks.

On 7/11/2007 6:08:12 PM, Clark wrote:

"Peter R." wrote in
:

On 7/11/2007 12:08:29 AM, Clark wrote:

Expect others to
acquiesce to your badgering?

My badgering? You asked if I had a point, so I explained it.


Yes, badgering.

Yawn.

--
Peter

Expect others to
acquiesce to your badgering?
My badgering? You asked if I had a point, so I explained it.
Yes, badgering.
Yawn.


It was refreshing to see the apology posted in the paper.
This thread would probably be much shorter if others tried it.

--
Message posted via http://www.aviationkb.com

Arnold Sten wrote:
GA Pilots are not the only pilots who are subject to noise complaints.
Read this story:


Subject: A Wake Up Call From Luke AFB, AZ

Luke AFB is west of Phoenix and is rapidly being
surrounded by civilization that complains about the
noise from the base and its planes, forgetting that it
was there long before they were.

A certain lieutenant colonel at Luke AFB deserves a
big pat on the back. Apparently, an individual who
lives somewhere near Luke AFB wrote the local paper
complaining about a group of F-16s that disturbed
his/her day at the mall. When that individual read the
response from a Luke AFB officer, it must have stung
quite a bit.

The complaint:
"Question of the day for Luke Air Force Base: Whom do
we thank for the morning air show? Last Wednesday, at
precisely 9:11 a.m., a tight formation of four F-16
jets made a low pass over Arrowhead Mall, continuing
west over Bell Road at approximately 500 feet.

Imagine our good fortune! Do the Tom Cruise-wannabes
feel we need this wake-up call, or were they trying to
impress the cashiers at Mervyns early bird special? Any
response would be appreciated."


The response:
Regarding "A wake-up call from Luke's jets" (Letters,
Thursday): On June 15, at precisely 9:12 a.m., a
perfectly timed four-ship flyby of F-16s from the 63rd
Fighter Squadron at Luke Air Force Base flew over the
grave of Capt. Jeremy Fresques.

Capt. Fresques was an Air Force officer who was
previously stationed at Luke Air Force Base and was
killed in Iraq on May 30, Memorial Day. At 9 a.m. on
June 15, his family and friends gathered at Sunland
Memorial Park in Sun City to mourn the loss of a
husband, son and friend.

Based on the letter writer's recount of the flyby,
and because of the jet noise, I'm sure you didn't hear
the 21-gun salute, the playing of taps, or my words to
the widow and parents of Capt. Fresques as I gave them
their son's flag on behalf of the President of the
United States and all those veterans and servicemen and
women who understand the sacrifices they have endured.
A four-ship flyby is a display of respect
the Air Force pays to those who give their lives in
defense of freedom.

We are professional aviators and take our jobs
seriously, and on June 15 what the letter writer
witnessed was four officers lining up to pay their
ultimate respects.

The letter writer asks, "Whom do we thank for the
morning air show?" The 56th Fighter Wing will call for
you, and forward your thanks to the widow and parents
of Capt. Fresques, and thank them for you, for it was
in their honor that my pilots flew the most honorable
formation of their lives.

Lt. Col. Scott Pleus
CO, 63rd Fighter Squadron
Luke AFB
I have a slightly different read on this incident.

It goes without saying that the ceremony was totally justified and in
line with all existing regulations. That isn't the real issue here.
Neither is the letter written by the complainant.
The real issue here is that the AF Col who answered the letter in my
opinion used extremely poor judgment in handling the situation the way
he did.
He used information that HE had at his disposal that was NOT available
to the complainant at the time the complainant wrote the letter, to
attempt to embarrass and hurt the complainant with the reply.
Had the Col prior knowledge that the complainant KNEW about the ceremony
and THEN wrote the letter, his answer in my opinion would have been
justified.
In my opinion, the Col's INITIAL response was unjustified and
unnecessarily cruel. Although it is understandable that he, being aware
of the circumstances involved, would be taken back by the complainant's
letter, his initial response should have been to reply in a
non-threatening manner, informing the complainant of the situation
involving the overflight giving the complainant an opportunity to
retract. By doing what he did, the Col in my opinion unnecessarily
deeply hurt an innocent person who had absolutely no idea that there
were extenuating circumstances involving a fallen comrade. From the
complainant's VOLUNTARY and IMMEDIATE retraction, it is clear that the
Col succeeded.
My read on this is bad judgment on the part of the Col caused by his
natural concern and deep feelings for the ceremony and the people
involved with it.
If I was Soloman, which I am not, and had the chance to talk to this
Col, I would explain what I have said here gently and with a deep
understanding for what he must have been feeling at the time. But make
no mistake; I would do my best to impress upon him the wrong path he
took in handling this delicate matter and encourage him to think twice
if faced with a similar incident again.
Dudley Henriques
President Emeritus
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
(has flown missing man formations)

Neil Gould wrote:
Recently, Paul Dow (Remove CAPS in address)
posted:

According to Snopes.com, this incident was in 2005.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/military/wakeup.asp


There was another letter that continued this topic.

To his credit, the complainant, Mr. MacRae, tendered a written apology
which was published in The Republic on 9 July:

[...]
I had no idea of the significance of the flyby, and would never have
insulted such a fine and respectful display had I known.
[...]
I served in the U.S. Navy and am a Vietnam veteran.

Anyone else have trouble reconciling these two statements?

Neil


Not at all. The first statement obviously is a referral to THIS SPECIFIC
flyby and indicates that the complainant was unaware that the flyby
involved a ceremony.
The second statement is a simple comment that indicates the complainant
was a veteran and had he known it was a cerimonial flyby would NOT have
written his letter.
I see no "sinister" indications here. I'm assuming you are referring to
a veteran having no idea what the significence of the flyby would be and
therefore suspect?
I don't see that at all.
Dudley Henriques

On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 14:00:10 -0400, Arnold Sten
wrote:

GA Pilots are not the only pilots who are subject to noise complaints.
Read this story:

On the lighter side, from what I hear around the airport, Hanscom
tower (BED) routinely gets noise complaints for military aircraft
arrivals/departures (fighters and transports).

Even when the flight doesn't actually happen, or lands hours removed
from the originally scheduled time.

I'd love to be on the receiving end of that call and free to tell the
person making the completely fictitious complaint exactly how stupid
they are. Anyone caught making fictitious noise complaints should
also be prohibited from filing any subsequent noise complaints.