From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sun Jul 1 20:55:17 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2001 15:55:17 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Aluminum Overcast Flight Message-ID: <75.16f7c07e.2870da25@aol.com> --part1_75.16f7c07e.2870da25_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To John Jenkins, As a former bombardier with the 360th squadron, I agree that the bombardier had the best view and I enjoyed that part, however, if you check statistics, you will find, I believe, that casualities were highest among bombardiers and tail gunners. Bob Finley --part1_75.16f7c07e.2870da25_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To John Jenkins,  As a former bombardier with the 360th squadron, I agree
that the bombardier had the best view and I enjoyed that part, however, if
you check statistics,  you will find, I believe, that casualities were
highest among bombardiers and tail gunners.
                                                                             
Bob Finley    --part1_75.16f7c07e.2870da25_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sun Jul 1 22:05:54 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Maurice Paulk) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2001 16:05:54 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Site 1 Site 7 Message-ID: <001301c10271$9e871f20$55bb9ace@mjpmtman> Thank you Mr. Beebe--I thought maybe I had lost my marbles . M. J. PAULK From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sun Jul 1 23:45:37 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2001 18:45:37 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Aluminum Overcast Flight Message-ID: --part1_b9.1019e794.28710211_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bob Finley, My perspective of the bombardier's view was limited to what I saw many decades after WWII was over. I am certain that in combat the view, and the risk associated with it, was not pleasant. Best Wishes, John A. Jenkins 6910 Old Redmond Road Redmond, WA 98052 USA Phone (425) 885-0595 --part1_b9.1019e794.28710211_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bob Finley,

      My perspective of the bombardier's view was limited to what I saw many
decades after WWII was over.  I am certain that in combat the view, and the
risk associated with it, was not pleasant.

Best Wishes,  

John A. Jenkins

6910 Old Redmond Road
Redmond, WA   98052   USA

Phone (425) 885-0595 --part1_b9.1019e794.28710211_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Jul 2 14:14:20 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Bill Owen) Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2001 08:14:20 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA Message-ID: <001b01c102f8$e8b36360$4d3f22d1@billowen> Bob Finley, I posted this previously. You may have missed it so here it is again. Regards, Bill Owen ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Owen" To: Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2001 8:10 PM Subject: 303rd BG-KIA Untitled Seeing the comments and questions about relative safety of the different crew positions aroused my curiousity. So I went through the entire personnel list from A to Z and wrote down the date of each man Killed In Action. I was pretty surprised that the numbers are so close. Seems that the Pilot-Copilot positions were most vulnerable (no doubt due to the front end attacks by fighters). The waist gunners were the safest since most attacks were from the front or rear and they were not directly exposed to either. It might be interesting to break it down month by month but I didn't take time to do that. For statistical purposes I put the Togliers in with the Bombardiers. 303rd BG-KIA KIA %of 1942 1943 1944 1945 Totals Total Pilot-Copilot 5 58 98 25 186 14.20 Bombardier 2 25(*26) 39(*43) 4(*8) 70(*79) 12.06 Navigator 2 21 45 11 79 12.06 Engineer 2 22 44 13 81 12.37 Radio 2 25 47 11 85 12.97 Waist Gun 6 57 64 7 134 10.23 Ball Turret 3 23 42 9 77 11.76 Tail Gunner 2 27 38 12 79 12.06 S/Jam ? 0 0 0 1 1 0.15 YRC ? 0 0 0 1 1 0.15 Photo 0 3 0 0 3 0.46 Toglier 0 (1) (4) (4) (9) 611 ? 0 0 3 0 3 0.46 612 ? 0 0 3 0 3 0.46 V/INTR ? 0 0 0 1 1 0.15 Stat/O ? 0 0 1 0 1 0.15 Observer 0 2 0 0 2 0.31 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----- -- TOTALS: 24 264 428 99 815 100.00 (* Toglier added to Bombardier total - same position?) The Pilot-Copilot positions were combined for number of KIA's and half that number used to determine % KIA. Waist gunners were done the same way. From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Jul 2 17:46:37 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2001 12:46:37 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] KIA Message-ID: <9d.17a90025.2871ff6d@aol.com> --part1_9d.17a90025.2871ff6d_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Good coments on caualties for bombardiers/tail gunners. I to was hit in the chest by a 20mm projectile being a toggelier. Thank GOD the thing didn't explode. To this day I'm very thankful that purhaps saw dust was in the projectile and not powder. (I still thank the sabatours if they were responsible for my not being killed). I was however knocked off the bombardiers seat and slammed against the side of the plane, knocked out and brusied. Quick thinking by my Nav. saved my life. He put my oxygen mask back on and when I came too I tried to get back to my guns. He then restrained me until I came back to reality. The projectile came from a 262 jet. I still have the projectile and it reminds me how lucky I was, --part1_9d.17a90025.2871ff6d_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Good coments on caualties for bombardiers/tail gunners. I to was hit in the
chest by a 20mm projectile being a toggelier. Thank GOD the thing didn't
explode. To this day I'm very thankful that purhaps saw dust was in the
projectile and not powder. (I still thank the sabatours if they were
responsible for my not being killed). I was however knocked off the
bombardiers seat and slammed against the side of the plane, knocked out and
brusied. Quick thinking by my Nav. saved my life. He put my oxygen mask back
on and when I came too I tried to get back to my guns. He then restrained me
until I came back to reality. The projectile came from a 262 jet. I still
have the projectile and it reminds me how lucky I was, --part1_9d.17a90025.2871ff6d_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Jul 2 19:53:32 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2001 14:53:32 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA Message-ID: <2d.de16c43.28721d2c@aol.com> Bill Owen & Bob Finley, I want to thank you fellows for running the report on the number and percentages of the positions on the crews that were KIA. I have alway maintained the Ball turret was probably the safest position on the crew but never did any extensive research like you did. I would like you to be aware of a couple of things and give me your opinion on what you think about my thoughts. (1) There always was two pilots so I find no argument with your methods. But they would always (nearly) be the last ones to bail out or maybe try to land the crippled bird after bailing the crew out. hence exposed to a bit more danger and/or exposed longer. (2) In mid 1944 one waist gunner was removed so we only had one waist gunner during the last half, more or less, of 1944. Would this make your percentage two low when you assumed 2 waist gunners for the entire period? Thanks Men Best Wishes, Jack Rencher From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 3 01:38:53 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Mike McClanahan) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2001 18:38:53 -0600 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Aluminum Overcast Denver visit References: <20010702160437.247E153586@pairlist.net> Message-ID: <3B41141C.46AA87E5@uswest.net> I just got back from seeing Aluminum Overcast at a suburban Denver airport (Jefferson County), an experience I thoroughly enjoyed in spite of not being able to either fly or take the ground tour. Spent an awful lot of time walking around, poking my head into whatever holes they would let me, and talking with some fascinating people. A few observations and questions, if I may: 1. I don't know if it's common, but the flights were booked up in advance here and are already sold out at its next stop in Colorado Springs (I might have gone if I could have flown). So Observation #1 is, if you want to fly, plan ahead and shop early! 2. The local press botched the story, so I showed up today for a ground tour only to find out that they ended yesterday. I was able to walk around as much as I wanted, though. Hence, Observation #2 - don't trust your news sources. Find out schedules for yourself! 3. Observation 3 - I was struck by how quiet the engines were. 150 feet behind the plane it was easy to converse in normal tones. I even asked the ground crew chief if they were muffled for civilian use and he said they weren't. They were definitely powerful, though, because Observation 4 is the amount of prop wash I felt. Since I couldn't fly, I didn't get Gary's Grin, but driving home, I noticed in the rear-view mirror that my hair was standing up. So I had a little grin of my own, knowing that it was courtesy four Cyclones of the Wright variety, rather than the everyday type I grew up with in Kansas. Now for some questions. A. Was the Cheyenne turret in the tail of Gs powered similarly to the ball? In other words, did the gunner operate it with levers instead of swinging flexible guns like they had on the F models. If that's the case, was the gunner inside the turret and moving with it, or was it turning independently of him? B. This plane, a G-model, had what seemed to be a fairly decent window around the waist guns. When I spoke with one of the crew, he told me that the Fs were wide-open to the elements with no protection for the gunners other than a deflector slightly ahead of the window to direct the blast of air away from the opening? I can't say that I remember seeing any of these deflectors on photos of Fs, although I wasn't looking for them, either. Anybody have any info? When the Overcast took off (after an hour's weather delay - crosswinds), the pilot circled the field and made a pass down the runway. As he flew by, he tipped the right wing in a salute to the crowd. I was struck with how much more sleek and graceful the plane was in flight than what I had imagined. It was quite a sight. A big tip of my wing to Boeing and to all you who flew, maintained and supplied the Fortresses and the wonderful job you did. Mike McClanahan PS Gary, I think the altitude and temperature concerns expressed at SLC were bogus. Jeffco is 5670' and it was 95 today and they had no problems. I think they just wanted to avoid the SLC traffic (and maybe the fees). They also have a 9000' runway at Jeffo, but didn't seem to need all of it. The 17 lifted off about the same spot as the bizjets. From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 3 02:35:01 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2001 21:35:01 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Aluminum Overcast Denver visit Message-ID: <119.112c346.28727b45@aol.com> Mike, The tail guns on the F & G models were not in a turret. They were flexible guns and the tail gunner had the but ends in his hands. The two guns were fastened together and fired together. If the gunner raised the but up the muzzles moved down just like the waist guns did. There was only one waist gun on each side. I do not remember any different windows on the waist guns between the F and the Gs. There was some difference in some of the older models and some models had the waist guns staggered as I remember but I don't remember which ones had that and which ones didn't. I hope you get a better answer from some of the gunners. Sorry you didn't get a ride on it. I used to work on the one the Confederate Air Force has in Mesa Arizona every Saturday. They took it up for a test flight there once and offered me a ride to go with them. I turned them down. I used to think I would probably die in one and I didn't. I didn't want to give fate another chance I might have gone if they would have said, You can do the flying, but they didn't. So I didn't. I still wouldn't. Best Wishes, Jack Rencher From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 3 06:20:37 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (robert w. hanson) Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2001 23:20:37 -0600 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Loose Ends-I Message-ID: <000c01c1037f$e6375380$5e8e0b3f@9exzq> Bill Heller: I was digging around in my WWII files and I came across some forms signed off by you showing my combat flight time from March through November 1944 and I was reminded that I had seen a message from you on the forum indicating you had worked for TWA and Lufthansa years ago. That message had raised my curiosity but I never followed up. I worked for Hughes Aircraft Co. for many years in LA and Tucson. While in LA I learned that Hughes had the reputation as the most progressive aerospace company in LA. I've often wondered if TWA was similarly managed. Your Lufthansa connection made me wonder if you were checked out on 707's in Tucson. When Lufthansa bought their first 707's their pilots were trained here in Tucson. and got a lot publicity. There was a restaurant called Lil Abner's Steak House northwest of Tucson where the student-pilots and their instructors spent a lot of time on weekends. The Germans seemed to like the steaks, the cowboy atmosphere and the country music. The only option you had there when you ordered dinner was, "How do you want your steak?" Were you a part of that? There are still hundreds of German names carved in the tablels and written on the walls. This might not be the place for this type of message but I don't have an email address for you and lately there has been a lot of room on the forum, so I thought I'd take a chance. Cheers Yank, Bob Hanson From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 3 14:05:33 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Bill Owen) Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 08:05:33 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA References: <2d.de16c43.28721d2c@aol.com> Message-ID: <001d01c103c0$d8d49860$1d3f22d1@billowen> Jack, you brought up a couple of good points. I'm sure you are probably right on both. I'm sure that some pilots-copilots probably were lost by staying with the plane too long out of necessity. The waist gunners percentage should be somewhat higher also. When I made this study I wasn't aware that the crews had cut back to one waist gunner late into the war. That seems like an odd thing to do...I mean if you needed a waist gunner at all seems to me you would need both of them. Best Wishes, Bill Owen ----- Original Message ----- From: To: <303rd-talk@303rdbga.com> Sent: Monday, July 02, 2001 1:53 PM Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA > Bill Owen & Bob Finley, > I want to thank you fellows for running the report on the number and > percentages of the positions on the crews that were KIA. I have alway > maintained the Ball turret was probably the safest position on the crew but > never did any extensive research like you did. > > I would like you to be aware of a couple of things and give me your > opinion on what you think about my thoughts. (1) There always was two pilots > so I find no argument with your methods. But they would always (nearly) be > the last ones to bail out or maybe try to land the crippled bird after > bailing the crew out. hence exposed to a bit more danger and/or exposed > longer. (2) In mid 1944 one waist gunner was removed so we only had one > waist gunner during the last half, more or less, of 1944. Would this make > your percentage two low when you assumed 2 waist gunners for the entire > period? Thanks Men > Best Wishes, > Jack Rencher > > From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 3 14:50:22 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 09:50:22 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA Message-ID: Bill Owen, The waist guns were very inefficient compared to the turrets, the nose and the tail. First there was only one gun out each side. 2nd because they were firing basically 90 degrees from the direction of flight they had a tremendous lead in order to hit anything. We were traveling about 3 miles or so per minute. If we were being attacked from 3 o'clock or 9 o'clock where the waist guns would be used, the gunner would have to aim about half way between the target and our tail. This made it very hard to hit anything with a waist gun. 3rd We didn't often get attacked from both sides at once so usually one gunner could turn from one gun to the other very easily. Even when we had 2 waist gunners rarely were they ever both firing at the same time. 4th. Between 1942 and 1945 the air war changed. In 1942 I had a pilot who finished his 25 missions tell me he had never seen a plane shot down by anti aircraft fire. All we had to worry about were the fighters. On my first mission in 1944 I saw the squadron 15 seconds ahead of us lose 7 planes to anti aircraft fire on their bomb run. There was not one fighter in the area. There were many crews in late 44 and 1945 who flew their 35 missions who's gunners never fired a shot at enemy fighters, but we had very heavy losses from 88 MM and 105 MM anti aircraft guns. Now you know why they dropped one waist gunner. Come to think of it. They didn't drop him. They just removed him from the crew. Saved parachutes that way. Best Wishes, Jack Rencher From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 3 15:42:30 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Gordon Alton) Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 07:42:30 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA References: Message-ID: <003a01c103ce$75346980$2d09f4cc@e0y0k4> Hi Jack, Heck of a nice reply to this question. I have read little snippets of why the second gunner was dropped, but you combined everything in a nutshell. I know what you mean about shooting at 90 degrees. Every tried shooting a gopher from a moving truck, heading down the road at even 30 miles an hour? It's impossible. I can imagine it at five times that speed. Some of the gunners must have got the knack of it though, didn't they? My Dad was a tailgunner, and he told me a bit about leading the fighters. Lots of times they would come from very high, or from below, to avoid the tail guns. That's when the ball turret really came into play. When the two gunners could work together, on an experienced crew, they could assist each other by telling the other guy exactly what the fighter was doing, and where he was heading, so the other guys guns would be ready in the brief one or two seconds he had to fire. Dad said he would be able to lead the fighter before he even saw it, if someone else knew what they were doing, and worked as a team. For instance, if the fighter was coming from 7 o'clock low, and unseen from the tail, the BTG would call him out, and the tail would have his guns pointed and ready. As soon as the guns in the ball stopped, Dad would fire, and the German would fly right through a hail of bullets, as he swooped up and away to avoid the ball and tail guns. As often as not, though, the bullets would bounce off the armor on the bottom of the fighter. If the fighter was close enough, would the bullets penetrate the armor? Anyone have experience in that regard? Teamwork. Gordy. ****************************************** "Our freedom is not free. Please remember those who fought to keep it." Gordon L. Alton 129 Mariko Place Salt Spring Island, BC, Can V8K1E1 ph 250-537-5913 fax 250-537-5981 gordy@saltspring.com ****************************************** ----- Original Message ----- From: To: <303rd-talk@303rdbga.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 6:50 AM Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA > Bill Owen, The waist guns were very inefficient compared to the turrets, the > nose and the tail. First there was only one gun out each side. 2nd because > they were firing basically 90 degrees from the direction of flight they had a > tremendous lead in order to hit anything. We were traveling about 3 miles or > so per minute. If we were being attacked from 3 o'clock or 9 o'clock where > the waist guns would be used, the gunner would have to aim about half way > between the target and our tail. This made it very hard to hit anything with > a waist gun. 3rd We didn't often get attacked from both sides at once so > usually one gunner could turn from one gun to the other very easily. Even > when we had 2 waist gunners rarely were they ever both firing at the same > time. 4th. Between 1942 and 1945 the air war changed. In 1942 I had a pilot > who finished his 25 missions tell me he had never seen a plane shot down by > anti aircraft fire. All we had to worry about were the fighters. On my first > mission in 1944 I saw the squadron 15 seconds ahead of us lose 7 planes to > anti aircraft fire on their bomb run. There was not one fighter in the area. > There were many crews in late 44 and 1945 who flew their 35 missions who's > gunners never fired a shot at enemy fighters, but we had very heavy losses > from 88 MM and 105 MM anti aircraft guns. Now you know why they dropped one > waist gunner. Come to think of it. They didn't drop him. They just removed > him from the crew. Saved parachutes that way. > Best Wishes, > Jack Rencher From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 3 18:41:21 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (William Heller) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2001 10:41:21 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA References: Message-ID: <3B4203C1.79297A75@attglobal.net> A waist gunner was removed so they could send him to the infantry where he was needed once the Battle of the Bulge cost so much. Anonymous Jprencher@aol.com wrote: > Bill Owen, The waist guns were very inefficient compared to the turrets, the > nose and the tail. First there was only one gun out each side. 2nd because > they were firing basically 90 degrees from the direction of flight they had a > tremendous lead in order to hit anything. We were traveling about 3 miles or > so per minute. If we were being attacked from 3 o'clock or 9 o'clock where > the waist guns would be used, the gunner would have to aim about half way > between the target and our tail. This made it very hard to hit anything with > a waist gun. 3rd We didn't often get attacked from both sides at once so > usually one gunner could turn from one gun to the other very easily. Even > when we had 2 waist gunners rarely were they ever both firing at the same > time. 4th. Between 1942 and 1945 the air war changed. In 1942 I had a pilot > who finished his 25 missions tell me he had never seen a plane shot down by > anti aircraft fire. All we had to worry about were the fighters. On my first > mission in 1944 I saw the squadron 15 seconds ahead of us lose 7 planes to > anti aircraft fire on their bomb run. There was not one fighter in the area. > There were many crews in late 44 and 1945 who flew their 35 missions who's > gunners never fired a shot at enemy fighters, but we had very heavy losses > from 88 MM and 105 MM anti aircraft guns. Now you know why they dropped one > waist gunner. Come to think of it. They didn't drop him. They just removed > him from the crew. Saved parachutes that way. > Best Wishes, > Jack Rencher From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 3 16:29:00 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 11:29:00 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Happy 4th of July Message-ID: <11f.1243045.28733ebc@aol.com> --part1_11f.1243045.28733ebc_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Happy 4th of July to all and a big THANK YOU to all the vets. Heidi Girman --part1_11f.1243045.28733ebc_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Happy 4th of July to all and a big THANK YOU to all the vets.

Heidi Girman --part1_11f.1243045.28733ebc_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 3 17:06:10 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Bill Owen) Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 11:06:10 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA References: Message-ID: <001101c103da$14e21800$333f22d1@billowen> Jack, thanks for the great reply. You have enlightened me considerably about the different gun positions. That is good info to know. Best, Bill Owen ----- Original Message ----- From: To: <303rd-talk@303rdbga.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 8:50 AM Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA > Bill Owen, The waist guns were very inefficient compared to the turrets, the > nose and the tail. First there was only one gun out each side. 2nd because > they were firing basically 90 degrees from the direction of flight they had a > tremendous lead in order to hit anything. We were traveling about 3 miles or > so per minute. If we were being attacked from 3 o'clock or 9 o'clock where > the waist guns would be used, the gunner would have to aim about half way > between the target and our tail. This made it very hard to hit anything with > a waist gun. 3rd We didn't often get attacked from both sides at once so > usually one gunner could turn from one gun to the other very easily. Even > when we had 2 waist gunners rarely were they ever both firing at the same > time. 4th. Between 1942 and 1945 the air war changed. In 1942 I had a pilot > who finished his 25 missions tell me he had never seen a plane shot down by > anti aircraft fire. All we had to worry about were the fighters. On my first > mission in 1944 I saw the squadron 15 seconds ahead of us lose 7 planes to > anti aircraft fire on their bomb run. There was not one fighter in the area. > There were many crews in late 44 and 1945 who flew their 35 missions who's > gunners never fired a shot at enemy fighters, but we had very heavy losses > from 88 MM and 105 MM anti aircraft guns. Now you know why they dropped one > waist gunner. Come to think of it. They didn't drop him. They just removed > him from the crew. Saved parachutes that way. > Best Wishes, > Jack Rencher > > From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 3 19:43:38 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2001 13:43:38 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA Message-ID: Gordy: I've got to reply to your question about armor on Luftwaffe fighters. As I've mentioned before to you, I know a pilot, Oskar Bosch, who was with VI.(Sturm)/JG 3, who flew both ME 109s and FW 190s, but at different times during the war. Oskar said that .50s would not penetrate the armor underneath his seat on his FW 190 unless he was very close to the origin of the shot and that the shot hit the armor at a perpendicular angle. If these two conditions were not met, then the shot would graze of the armor plate, but, as he put it, "leave your ass really sore." What Oskar loved most about his FW 190s was, in his own words, "that big life-saving radial engine." His Sturmstaffel almost always attacked from the rear. He said they would try to knock out the tail gunner first, then the ball gunner, with the 20 and 30 mm cannons while sitting out of range of our .50s. After those positions were neutralized (he was always very careful not to say "killed"), then they would close at an angle to the rear of the plane and slightly above the plane to avoid the waist guns. As they closed in on the Forts, he said they would hunker down in the cockpit and try to make themselves as small as possible. If the tail or waist was still operational, that big radial would take the shots. He said those radials saved his life on several occasions. Then they would aim at where the fuselage met the wing where the main fuel cells were located. He also said on one sweep, his radial was hit and blew a cylinder head completely off, but the engine kept turning and he made it back to Käten. Oskar was with a Sturmstaffel, a specially equipped "hunter/killer" unit that went after the bombers. Their tactics differed from those used by other units and their tactics differed greatly from the beginning of the war to the end. When he was flying 109s early in 1943, he said they attacked head on because our Forts didn't have the Bendix chin turrets as the later G models had. He also said they were quite "sensitive" to the firepower of a B-17 and wanted to minimize the amount of time exposed to our guns. This was when Oskar was flying for 301/JG 3 "Udet." Later in the war with 190s and in the Sturmstaffel, their tactics changed because of experience and their mission of knocking down bombers. With a head on attack, closure rates were in excess of 500 mph, making only short bursts possible which were not effective in downing the sturdy 17s. Oskar's Sturmstaffel experiences were in mid 44 to early 45, before being transfered to defense missions around Berlin. Hope this answered your question. Kevin >From: "Gordon Alton" >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA >Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 07:42:30 -0700 > >Hi Jack, > Heck of a nice reply to this question. I have read little snippets of >why the second gunner was dropped, but you combined everything in a >nutshell. I know what you mean about shooting at 90 degrees. Every tried >shooting a gopher from a moving truck, heading down the road at even 30 >miles an hour? It's impossible. I can imagine it at five times that speed. >Some of the gunners must have got the knack of it though, didn't they? > My Dad was a tailgunner, and he told me a bit about leading the >fighters. Lots of times they would come from very high, or from below, to >avoid the tail guns. That's when the ball turret really came into play. >When >the two gunners could work together, on an experienced crew, they could >assist each other by telling the other guy exactly what the fighter was >doing, and where he was heading, so the other guys guns would be ready in >the brief one or two seconds he had to fire. Dad said he would be able to >lead the fighter before he even saw it, if someone else knew what they were >doing, and worked as a team. For instance, if the fighter was coming from 7 >o'clock low, and unseen from the tail, the BTG would call him out, and the >tail would have his guns pointed and ready. As soon as the guns in the ball >stopped, Dad would fire, and the German would fly right through a hail of >bullets, as he swooped up and away to avoid the ball and tail guns. > As often as not, though, the bullets would bounce off the armor on the >bottom of the fighter. If the fighter was close enough, would the bullets >penetrate the armor? Anyone have experience in that regard? >Teamwork. >Gordy. > >****************************************** >"Our freedom is not free. Please >remember those who fought to keep it." >Gordon L. Alton >129 Mariko Place >Salt Spring Island, BC, Can V8K1E1 >ph 250-537-5913 fax 250-537-5981 >gordy@saltspring.com >****************************************** > >----- Original Message ----- >From: >To: <303rd-talk@303rdbga.com> >Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 6:50 AM >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA > > > > Bill Owen, The waist guns were very inefficient compared to the turrets, >the > > nose and the tail. First there was only one gun out each side. 2nd >because > > they were firing basically 90 degrees from the direction of flight they >had a > > tremendous lead in order to hit anything. We were traveling about 3 >miles >or > > so per minute. If we were being attacked from 3 o'clock or 9 o'clock >where > > the waist guns would be used, the gunner would have to aim about half >way > > between the target and our tail. This made it very hard to hit anything >with > > a waist gun. 3rd We didn't often get attacked from both sides at once so > > usually one gunner could turn from one gun to the other very easily. >Even > > when we had 2 waist gunners rarely were they ever both firing at the >same > > time. 4th. Between 1942 and 1945 the air war changed. In 1942 I had a >pilot > > who finished his 25 missions tell me he had never seen a plane shot down >by > > anti aircraft fire. All we had to worry about were the fighters. On my >first > > mission in 1944 I saw the squadron 15 seconds ahead of us lose 7 planes >to > > anti aircraft fire on their bomb run. There was not one fighter in the >area. > > There were many crews in late 44 and 1945 who flew their 35 missions >who's > > gunners never fired a shot at enemy fighters, but we had very heavy >losses > > from 88 MM and 105 MM anti aircraft guns. Now you know why they dropped >one > > waist gunner. Come to think of it. They didn't drop him. They just >removed > > him from the crew. Saved parachutes that way. > > Best Wishes, > > Jack Rencher > > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 3 19:51:41 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2001 13:51:41 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Radio Operators Message-ID: They also did away with radio operators in some ships in some groups in mid and late 44. Here are the MACR for six Forts from the 91st BG(H), 324th BS, lost 16.8.44, enroute to the Seibel Aircraft works at Halle. Note, no Radio Operators were on board. MISSING AIR CREW REPORT 16 AUGUST 1944 (1) B-17 43-3800 91STBG 322NDBS (FIGHTERS) CRASHED NEAR LEHNA MACR 8181 (P) 2ND LT. RESSE W. LINDSEY KIA ROCKY RIVER, OH (CP) 2ND LT. ALBERT J PERRY KIA LaGRANGE, GA (N) 2ND LT. CLAYTON B. BAUGH KIA GROVE HILL, AL (B) 2ND LT. LEE G. BRATCHER KIA HILLSBORO, TX (TT) SGT. JOHN C. CRABB KIA OKLHMA CITY, OK (R) (BT) SGT. JOHN V. BUXTON KIA MIAMI, FL (RW) SGT. ROBERT L. SCHRECENGOST KIA BEAVER FLLS, PA (LW) SGT. CLEO H. GATES KIA TYLER, TX (TG) SGT. LEWIS C. MORGAN POW ELKHART, KS (2) B-17 44-6126 91STBG 322NDBS (FIGHTERS) CRASHED AT CHARTES MACR 8185 (P) 1ST LT. JOHN L. LESLIE KIA NORBERTT, PA (CP) 2ND LT. JOHN E. SAVAGE KIA TURLOCK, CA (N) 2ND LT. STANLEY KOSS KIA BROOKLYN, NY (B) F/O EARL W. DONLEY KIA ELIZABETHTN, PA (TT) T/SGT. JOSEPH H. GODFREY POW LONGVIEW, TX (R) (BT) S/SGT. IVAN F. DOYLE POW CURTIS, NE (RW) T/SGT. JAMES I. MIDDLETON POW HENDERSON, KY (LW) S/SGT. DOUGLAS BUNTIN KIA LONGBEACH, CA (TG) S/SGT. LOUIS KOS KIA ERIE, PA (3) B-17 TXS CHBBY-THE J’VLL JKR 42-31634 91STBG 324THBS (FIGHTERS) CRASHED AT KITCHENBERG MACR 8184 (P) 1ST LT. HALSTEAD SHERRIL KIA FLUSHING, NY (CP) 2ND LT. FRANK J. GILLIGAN KIA KENMORE, (N) 2ND LT. WILLIAM M. PORTER POW SAN ANTONIO, TX (B) 2ND LT. NICHOLAS J. WEBER POW ALLISON, PA (TT) SGT. VERNON E. BAUERLING KIA LITTLETOWN, PA (R) (BT) S/SGT. ENRIQUE T. PEREZ KIA BLOWETT, TX (RW) S/SGT. JOSEPH R. MORRISON KIA FORT WAYNE, IN (LW) RICHARD J. MUNKWITZ POW DETROIT, MI (TG) SGT. CHESTER W. MIS POW LA SOLLO, IL (4) B-17 43-38012 91STBG 324THBS (FIGHTERS) CRASHED AT WITZENHAUSEN MACR 8180 (P) 2ND LT. VINCENT A. FONKE POW BREESE, IL (CP) 2ND LT. FRED W. VAN SLANT POW OAKLAND, CA (N) 2ND LT. ROBERT W. SIMCOCK, JR. POW BURLINGAME, CA (B) 2ND LT. HERBERT CARLSON POW BROOKLYN, NY (TT) S/SGT. RAYMOND V. PRANGE POW PORTLAND, OR (R) (BT) SGT. CHARLES S. BRUDO POW SEATTLE, WA (RW) S/SGT. WENDELL O. MEENACH POW INDIANPOLS, IN (LW) SGT. WILLIAM J. WEAVER POW CONNERSVILLE, IN (TG) SGT. WILLARD M. HOLDEN KIA SABIN, MN (5) B-17 LASSIE COMING HOME 42-31673 91STBG 324THBS (FIGHTERS) CRASHED AT DEIDERODE MACR 8183 (P) 2ND LT. LEONARD F. FIGIE POW (CP) 2ND LT. DALE W. WHITSON KIA (N) 2ND LT. FREDERICK SEIBEL KIA (B) (TT) T/SGT. WALTER L. CARPENTER POW (R) (BT) SGT. FREDERICK D. BALDWIN KIA (RW) SGT. EDMUND J. MIKOLAITUS KIA (LW) S/SGT. WALTER SALO POW (TG) SGT. JOHN F. WALLASZEK POW (NG) S/SGT. HARLON B. WILLIAMS POW (6) B-17 BOSTON BOMBSHELL 42-39996 91STBG 324THBS (FIGHTERS) CRASHED AT MARSHAUSEN MACR 8179 (P) 2ND LT. JOHN V. DUNLAP POW ATLANTA, GA (CP) F/O JOSEPH J. CATER KIA YONKERS, NY (N) 2ND LT. HUBERT B. CARPENTER POW PITSBURG, TX (B) (TT) SGT. VINCENT M. BEACH KIA REDONDO BEACH, CA (R) (BT) SGT. ARTHUR B. MANCINO KIA YOUNGSTOWN, OH (RW) SGT. JOHN W. BARCLAY KIA HOUSTON, TX (LW) SGT. FRANK J. SIMONE KIA EDGEWOOD, PA (TG) SGT. ROBERT M. PASTER KIA MAPLE HGTS, OH (NG) SGT. LESLIE D. ALGEE KIA PRESCOTT, AL _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 3 20:08:45 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2001 14:08:45 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA Message-ID: I honestly tried to stay away from this forum for the last two weeks, but found myself drawn to it everyday. You guys are addictive, you know it? And for Bill Heller, I've got to apologize for going ballistic over the Mexican comments - sorry. Enough said. I guess the one thing I absolutely hated about the History Channel's "Suicide Missions - The Ball Turret Gunner" was the program made the ball sound like the most dangerous of all positions, which we all know is nonsense. And the stats presented yesterday on how many of each crew position were lost by month is statistically flawed - something called "systematically biased." If a Fort was mortally wounded and she was going down, everyone still alive would try to get out, right? So when a ship went down, the entire crew went with it - whether trapped inside, killed, or parachuting to safety, or in some cases, death at the hands of the German civilians. So to judge one position over another as being more dangerous is a bit flawed when you consider crew losses by the number of a/c lost. But I do appreciate the effort. It is very humbling for this non veteran to see such losses, especially a couple of days before the 4th. A better way to calculate the most dangerous crew position, and probably not even possible, would be to measure those men killed or wounded whose ships actually returned to England. Anyone care to take a stab at this one? In one of Freeman's books he gives it a go, but with several caveots - can't remember which one now. And it seems I remember the waist gunners had the most dangerous job on the Forts. Don't care if they could only fire at a 90 degree angle to the path of the plane, 20 and 30 mm fired in front of the plane or behind it had a tendency to rip through the guts of the plane and go off just about anywhere, since many of the 20s and 30s exploded based on time delayed fusing, however, the Naxis did use contact fuses as well. Just thought I'd add my two cents. Kevin _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 3 20:08:45 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2001 14:08:45 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA Message-ID: I honestly tried to stay away from this forum for the last two weeks, but found myself drawn to it everyday. You guys are addictive, you know it? And for Bill Heller, I've got to apologize for going ballistic over the Mexican comments - sorry. Enough said. I guess the one thing I absolutely hated about the History Channel's "Suicide Missions - The Ball Turret Gunner" was the program made the ball sound like the most dangerous of all positions, which we all know is nonsense. And the stats presented yesterday on how many of each crew position were lost by month is statistically flawed - something called "systematically biased." If a Fort was mortally wounded and she was going down, everyone still alive would try to get out, right? So when a ship went down, the entire crew went with it - whether trapped inside, killed, or parachuting to safety, or in some cases, death at the hands of the German civilians. So to judge one position over another as being more dangerous is a bit flawed when you consider crew losses by the number of a/c lost. But I do appreciate the effort. It is very humbling for this non veteran to see such losses, especially a couple of days before the 4th. A better way to calculate the most dangerous crew position, and probably not even possible, would be to measure those men killed or wounded whose ships actually returned to England. Anyone care to take a stab at this one? In one of Freeman's books he gives it a go, but with several caveots - can't remember which one now. And it seems I remember the waist gunners had the most dangerous job on the Forts. Don't care if they could only fire at a 90 degree angle to the path of the plane, 20 and 30 mm fired in front of the plane or behind it had a tendency to rip through the guts of the plane and go off just about anywhere, since many of the 20s and 30s exploded based on time delayed fusing, however, the Naxis did use contact fuses as well. Just thought I'd add my two cents. Kevin _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 3 21:36:29 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 16:36:29 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] KIA Message-ID: <8.16ac2f84.287386cd@aol.com> i too have the piece of their flak about one half inch in diameter and 3 inches long, that was stopped by the aluminum tourniqet twister on my back pack shoot harness. was knocked up and bak. shorted my heated suit connection ,but as buddy navigator helped immeasurably. spec From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 3 21:46:58 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Jim Walling) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2001 10:46:58 -1000 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Waist Gunners In-Reply-To: <8.16ac2f84.287386cd@aol.com> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20010703104658.00873350@ilhawaii.net> We flew our first mission on 26Nov44 and our 35th on 20Mar45. We flew with one waist gunner until 22Feb45 and with no waist gunner for the last twelve missions. None of our gunners fired at an enemy aircraft untll we were hit by ME-262 jets on our last mission. The only person injured on our crew was the Waist gunner, who was hit by flak on 10Jan45. He was hospitalized and flew no more missions. Jim Walling > > From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 3 23:47:10 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 18:47:10 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA Message-ID: <128.ec2756.2873a56e@aol.com> Gordy, I never flew the German fighters so I can only offer an opinion. If the range was close and the 50 caliber bullets hit direct (straight) in at a 90 degree angle I would suspect the bullets would penetrate the armor. If they hit at an angle like 45 degrees I would suspect the would rickashay off, maybe more so on the 190 than the 109s. Like our P47s that big radial engine up front in the 190 was the best armor they had. They could shoot a P51 down with a 22 short if it made a hole in the radiator. I don't recall the 303rd flying any missions without a radio operator and at least one waist gunner when I was there. I flew my 35th mission Christmas Eve 1944. I don't know what happened after that. I was in the US bragging and chasing women like the Bombardiers taught me. They did well. I caught one. I miss her. We were together for 51 years. Best Wishes, Jack Rencher From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 4 00:10:29 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 19:10:29 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA Message-ID: <10.f05d8df.2873aae5@aol.com> Kevin, No criticism but think a bit. There was probably not one plane that ever flew home with 2 dead pilots, Dead headed? yes sometimes. Dead Drunk? once in a while. Dead on their feet? Often. Dead wrong? Over half the time. Dead headed? All of us or we would have washed ourselves out while in Cadets. But just dead? no Kevin, Like the ball turret gunner in the ball when it made a belly landing. because of a hydraulic failure. It just didn't happen. Never ever not even once. Welcome back, Happy 4th You All. Jack Rencher From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 4 02:34:49 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Maurice Paulk) Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 20:34:49 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Waist gun windows Message-ID: <001e01c10429$85645580$21bb9ace@mjpmtman> Jim Walling--you seem to be the logical man to answer that question. It seems to me that I remember seeing a window that swung in and swung or rolled back [towards the tail]. I flew to Casablanca in a "G" but can't remember anything about the windows --to busy looking at the scenery when we flew over Spain at 10,000 ft-----. M. J. PAULK From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 4 03:02:45 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Jim Walling) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2001 16:02:45 -1000 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Waist gun windows In-Reply-To: <001e01c10429$85645580$21bb9ace@mjpmtman> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20010703160245.00874780@ilhawaii.net> M. J. Faulk, I guess I'm not the one either, as I don't remember. I was a ball turret gunner and the only time I flew at a waist gun I had just gotten out of my turret where I had passed out from lack of oxygen, so thing were not too clear. I don't believe there were windows at the waist openings. Jim Walling M 7/3/01 -0500, you wrote: >Jim Walling--you seem to be the logical man to answer that question. It >seems to me that I remember seeing a window that swung in and swung or >rolled back [towards the tail]. I flew to Casablanca in a "G" but can't >remember anything about the windows --to busy looking at the scenery when we >flew over Spain at 10,000 ft-----. M. J. PAULK > > > > > From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 4 05:09:34 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2001 04:09:34 +0000 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Waist gun windows Message-ID: <20010704040934.MYBY3208.mtiwmhc21.worldnet.att.net@webmail.worldnet.att.net> The G model B-17 aircraft that I flew in had permanently enclosed windows in the waist area. I also flew on one F model and it was the same. The time frame was early 1945. Bill Runnels, bombardier > M. J. Faulk, > > I guess I'm not the one either, as I don't remember. I was a ball turret gunner > and the only time I flew at a waist gun I had just gotten out of my turret where > I had passed out from lack of oxygen, so thing were not too clear. I don't > believe there were windows at the waist openings. > > > > > > > From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 4 16:46:11 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 11:46:11 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA Message-ID: <120.133719c.28749443@aol.com> --part1_120.133719c.28749443_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jack, The statistics that I quoted about bombardiers and tail gunners having the highest casualty rates didn't indicate whether or not they KIA and I don't remember the source. Sorry, Bob Finley --part1_120.133719c.28749443_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jack,  The statistics that I quoted about bombardiers and tail gunners having
the highest casualty rates didn't indicate whether or not they KIA and I
don't remember the source.                                                   
Sorry, Bob Finley --part1_120.133719c.28749443_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 4 18:01:39 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Maurice Paulk) Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 12:01:39 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] WAIST GUN WINDOWS Message-ID: <000801c104ab$00355b20$0ebb9ace@mjpmtman> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C10481.15928260 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BILL RUNNELS & JIM WALLING----Thank you fellows! You might be = interested in perusing=20 a book I found hidden on my book shelf---FLYING FORTRESS - The Boeing = B-17 --by Ernest R. McDowell - squadron/signal publications. On page 79 HALL OF FAME = --Hell's Angels and Knockout Dropper are listed. PAGE 3 - illustrations - B-17 B - C- & D show tear-drop "blisters on the = waist. B-17E -----F-1---F-15-DL & F-55-BO & F-75-DL show what appears to be a 3 = section windo with deflector on the leading edge of the window. B-17G-1 shows open windo with deflector and a protuding waist gun. B-17G-80-BO & G-55-VE & G-25-DL shoiw a plain window - no deflector = with a sqluare at the=20 bottom center of the window. I bought this book in July of '92 when a = B-17G and aB- 24 were in Grand Island. Think it was from the Confederate air force = B-17--white triangle A - 231909 - R on the vertical stab.[found a photo.]---There are some real good = photos showing the development of the 17 from the XB models on up Wish I could give you publishers address -can't find it anywhere. In '92 = I paid $7.95 for the 8 1/2" X 11" paper bound book.=20 MAURICE PAULK =20 ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C10481.15928260 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
BILL RUNNELS & JIM WALLING----Thank = you=20 fellows!  You might be interested in perusing
a book I found hidden on my book = shelf---FLYING=20 FORTRESS - The Boeing B-17 --by Ernest
 R. McDowell - squadron/signal = publications.=20 On page 79 HALL OF FAME --Hell's Angels
 and Knockout Dropper are = listed.
PAGE 3 - illustrations - B-17 B - = C- & D=20 show tear-drop "blisters on the waist.
B-17E -----F-1---F-15-DL & F-55-BO = &=20 F-75-DL show what appears to be a 3 section windo
 with deflector on the leading = edge of the=20 window.
B-17G-1 shows open windo with deflector = and a=20 protuding waist gun.
B-17G-80-BO & G-55-VE & G-25-DL = shoiw a=20 plain window - no deflector  with a sqluare at the
bottom center of the window. I bought = this book in=20 July of '92 when a B-17G and aB- 24 were
 in Grand Island. Think it was = from the=20 Confederate air force B-17--white triangle A - 231909 - R
 on the vertical  stab.[found = a=20 photo.]---There are some real good = photos showing=20 the development
of the 17 from the XB models on=20 up
 
Wish I could give you publishers = address -can't=20 find it anywhere. In '92 I paid $7.95 for the 8 1/2" X 11" = paper
bound book. 
 
MAURICE=20 PAULK
          =20
------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C10481.15928260-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 4 17:47:31 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 12:47:31 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Most Dangerous position Message-ID: <1e.1813790d.2874a2a3@aol.com> --part1_1e.1813790d.2874a2a3_boundary Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_1e.1813790d.2874a2a3_alt_boundary" --part1_1e.1813790d.2874a2a3_alt_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit For the thirty-one 303rd BG(H) crewmen who were killed in action and bodies returned to Molesworth see: http://www.303rdbga.com/kia-rtb.html Nose area Navigator (6) Bombardier (3) Cockpit Area Pilot (1) CoPilot (6) Engineer (1) Aft of Bomb Bay Radio (2) Ball Turret (1) Left Waist (2) Right Waist (2) Waist (2) Tail Gunner (5) Draw your own conclusions as to the safest position Harry D. Gobrecht --part1_1e.1813790d.2874a2a3_alt_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit For the thirty-one 303rd BG(H) crewmen who were killed in action and bodies
returned to Molesworth see: http://www.303rdbga.com/kia-rtb.html
Nose area
Navigator (6)
Bombardier (3)
Cockpit Area
Pilot      (1)
CoPilot  (6)
Engineer (1)
Aft of Bomb Bay
Radio (2)
Ball Turret (1)
Left Waist (2)
Right Waist (2)
Waist (2)
Tail Gunner (5)
Draw your own conclusions as to the safest position

Harry D. Gobrecht --part1_1e.1813790d.2874a2a3_alt_boundary-- --part1_1e.1813790d.2874a2a3_boundary Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: <303rd-talk-admin@303rdBGA.com> Received: from rly-yg01.mx.aol.com (rly-yg01.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.1]) by air-yg05.mail.aol.com (v78_r3.8) with ESMTP; Wed, 04 Jul 2001 12:13:59 -0400 Received: from pairlist.net (pairlist.net [216.92.1.92]) by rly-yg01.mx.aol.com (v79.20) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINYG18-0704121258; Wed, 04 Jul 2001 12:12:58 -0400 Received: from pairlist.net (localhost.pair.com [127.0.0.1]) by pairlist.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2FDD536F9; Wed, 4 Jul 2001 12:04:47 -0400 (EDT) From: 303rd-talk-request@303rdBGA.com Subject: 303rd-Talk digest, Vol 1 #322 - 9 msgs X-Mailer: Mailman v2.0 MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sender: 303rd-talk-admin@303rdBGA.com Errors-To: 303rd-talk-admin@303rdBGA.com X-BeenThere: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com X-Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: 303rd Bomb Group Forum <303rd-talk.303rdBGA.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Message-Id: <20010704160447.B2FDD536F9@pairlist.net> Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 12:04:47 -0400 (EDT) Send 303rd-Talk mailing list submissions to 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/303rd-talk or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to 303rd-talk-request@303rdBGA.com You can reach the person managing the list at 303rd-talk-admin@303rdBGA.com When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of 303rd-Talk digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Fw: 303rd BG-KIA (Jprencher@aol.com) 2. Re: Fw: 303rd BG-KIA (Jprencher@aol.com) 3. Waist gun windows (Maurice Paulk) 4. Re: Waist gun windows (Jim Walling) 5. Re: Waist gun windows (b.runnels@att.net) 6. Re: Fw: 303rd BG-KIA (=?iso-8859-1?Q?FRANCISCO_QUI=D1ONES?=) 7. Re: Radio Operators (=?iso-8859-1?Q?FRANCISCO_QUI=D1ONES?=) 8. Re: Fw: 303rd BG-KIA (=?iso-8859-1?Q?FRANCISCO_QUI=D1ONES?=) 9. Re: Fw: 303rd BG-KIA (yelnifar@aol.com) --__--__-- Message: 1 From: Jprencher@aol.com Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 18:47:10 EDT Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA To: 303rd-talk@303rdbga.com Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Gordy, I never flew the German fighters so I can only offer an opinion. If the range was close and the 50 caliber bullets hit direct (straight) in at a 90 degree angle I would suspect the bullets would penetrate the armor. If they hit at an angle like 45 degrees I would suspect the would rickashay off, maybe more so on the 190 than the 109s. Like our P47s that big radial engine up front in the 190 was the best armor they had. They could shoot a P51 down with a 22 short if it made a hole in the radiator. I don't recall the 303rd flying any missions without a radio operator and at least one waist gunner when I was there. I flew my 35th mission Christmas Eve 1944. I don't know what happened after that. I was in the US bragging and chasing women like the Bombardiers taught me. They did well. I caught one. I miss her. We were together for 51 years. Best Wishes, Jack Rencher --__--__-- Message: 2 From: Jprencher@aol.com Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 19:10:29 EDT Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA To: 303rd-talk@303rdbga.com Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Kevin, No criticism but think a bit. There was probably not one plane that ever flew home with 2 dead pilots, Dead headed? yes sometimes. Dead Drunk? once in a while. Dead on their feet? Often. Dead wrong? Over half the time. Dead headed? All of us or we would have washed ourselves out while in Cadets. But just dead? no Kevin, Like the ball turret gunner in the ball when it made a belly landing. because of a hydraulic failure. It just didn't happen. Never ever not even once. Welcome back, Happy 4th You All. Jack Rencher --__--__-- Message: 3 From: "Maurice Paulk" To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 20:34:49 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Waist gun windows Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Jim Walling--you seem to be the logical man to answer that question. It seems to me that I remember seeing a window that swung in and swung or rolled back [towards the tail]. I flew to Casablanca in a "G" but can't remember anything about the windows --to busy looking at the scenery when we flew over Spain at 10,000 ft-----. M. J. PAULK --__--__-- Message: 4 Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2001 16:02:45 -1000 To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com From: Jim Walling Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Waist gun windows Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com M. J. Faulk, I guess I'm not the one either, as I don't remember. I was a ball turret gunner and the only time I flew at a waist gun I had just gotten out of my turret where I had passed out from lack of oxygen, so thing were not too clear. I don't believe there were windows at the waist openings. Jim Walling M 7/3/01 -0500, you wrote: >Jim Walling--you seem to be the logical man to answer that question. It >seems to me that I remember seeing a window that swung in and swung or >rolled back [towards the tail]. I flew to Casablanca in a "G" but can't >remember anything about the windows --to busy looking at the scenery when we >flew over Spain at 10,000 ft-----. M. J. PAULK > > > > > --__--__-- Message: 5 From: b.runnels@att.net To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Waist gun windows Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2001 04:09:34 +0000 Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com The G model B-17 aircraft that I flew in had permanently enclosed windows in the waist area. I also flew on one F model and it was the same. The time frame was early 1945. Bill Runnels, bombardier > M. J. Faulk, > > I guess I'm not the one either, as I don't remember. I was a ball turret gunner > and the only time I flew at a waist gun I had just gotten out of my turret where > I had passed out from lack of oxygen, so thing were not too clear. I don't > believe there were windows at the waist openings. > > > > > > > --__--__-- Message: 6 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?FRANCISCO_QUI=D1ONES?= To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 20:57:24 -0400 Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Very interesting remarks by Oskar Bosch do you happen to know his victory claims over our bombers and units he he was in any information appreciated. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin Pearson" To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 2:43 PM Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA > Gordy: I've got to reply to your question about armor on Luftwaffe > fighters. As I've mentioned before to you, I know a pilot, Oskar Bosch, who > was with VI.(Sturm)/JG 3, who flew both ME 109s and FW 190s, but at > different times during the war. Oskar said that .50s would not penetrate > the armor underneath his seat on his FW 190 unless he was very close to the > origin of the shot and that the shot hit the armor at a perpendicular angle. > If these two conditions were not met, then the shot would graze of the > armor plate, but, as he put it, "leave your ass really sore." > > What Oskar loved most about his FW 190s was, in his own words, "that big > life-saving radial engine." His Sturmstaffel almost always attacked from > the rear. He said they would try to knock out the tail gunner first, then > the ball gunner, with the 20 and 30 mm cannons while sitting out of range of > our .50s. After those positions were neutralized (he was always very > careful not to say "killed"), then they would close at an angle to the rear > of the plane and slightly above the plane to avoid the waist guns. As they > closed in on the Forts, he said they would hunker down in the cockpit and > try to make themselves as small as possible. If the tail or waist was still > operational, that big radial would take the shots. He said those radials > saved his life on several occasions. Then they would aim at where the > fuselage met the wing where the main fuel cells were located. He also said > on one sweep, his radial was hit and blew a cylinder head completely off, > but the engine kept turning and he made it back to Käten. > > Oskar was with a Sturmstaffel, a specially equipped "hunter/killer" unit > that went after the bombers. Their tactics differed from those used by > other units and their tactics differed greatly from the beginning of the war > to the end. When he was flying 109s early in 1943, he said they attacked > head on because our Forts didn't have the Bendix chin turrets as the later G > models had. He also said they were quite "sensitive" to the firepower of a > B-17 and wanted to minimize the amount of time exposed to our guns. This > was when Oskar was flying for 301/JG 3 "Udet." Later in the war with 190s > and in the Sturmstaffel, their tactics changed because of experience and > their mission of knocking down bombers. With a head on attack, closure > rates were in excess of 500 mph, making only short bursts possible which > were not effective in downing the sturdy 17s. Oskar's Sturmstaffel > experiences were in mid 44 to early 45, before being transfered to defense > missions around Berlin. > > Hope this answered your question. > Kevin > > > > >From: "Gordon Alton" > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA > >Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 07:42:30 -0700 > > > >Hi Jack, > > Heck of a nice reply to this question. I have read little snippets of > >why the second gunner was dropped, but you combined everything in a > >nutshell. I know what you mean about shooting at 90 degrees. Every tried > >shooting a gopher from a moving truck, heading down the road at even 30 > >miles an hour? It's impossible. I can imagine it at five times that speed. > >Some of the gunners must have got the knack of it though, didn't they? > > My Dad was a tailgunner, and he told me a bit about leading the > >fighters. Lots of times they would come from very high, or from below, to > >avoid the tail guns. That's when the ball turret really came into play. > >When > >the two gunners could work together, on an experienced crew, they could > >assist each other by telling the other guy exactly what the fighter was > >doing, and where he was heading, so the other guys guns would be ready in > >the brief one or two seconds he had to fire. Dad said he would be able to > >lead the fighter before he even saw it, if someone else knew what they were > >doing, and worked as a team. For instance, if the fighter was coming from 7 > >o'clock low, and unseen from the tail, the BTG would call him out, and the > >tail would have his guns pointed and ready. As soon as the guns in the ball > >stopped, Dad would fire, and the German would fly right through a hail of > >bullets, as he swooped up and away to avoid the ball and tail guns. > > As often as not, though, the bullets would bounce off the armor on the > >bottom of the fighter. If the fighter was close enough, would the bullets > >penetrate the armor? Anyone have experience in that regard? > >Teamwork. > >Gordy. > > > >****************************************** > >"Our freedom is not free. Please > >remember those who fought to keep it." > >Gordon L. Alton > >129 Mariko Place > >Salt Spring Island, BC, Can V8K1E1 > >ph 250-537-5913 fax 250-537-5981 > >gordy@saltspring.com > >****************************************** > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdbga.com> > >Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 6:50 AM > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA > > > > > > > Bill Owen, The waist guns were very inefficient compared to the turrets, > >the > > > nose and the tail. First there was only one gun out each side. 2nd > >because > > > they were firing basically 90 degrees from the direction of flight they > >had a > > > tremendous lead in order to hit anything. We were traveling about 3 > >miles > >or > > > so per minute. If we were being attacked from 3 o'clock or 9 o'clock > >where > > > the waist guns would be used, the gunner would have to aim about half > >way > > > between the target and our tail. This made it very hard to hit anything > >with > > > a waist gun. 3rd We didn't often get attacked from both sides at once so > > > usually one gunner could turn from one gun to the other very easily. > >Even > > > when we had 2 waist gunners rarely were they ever both firing at the > >same > > > time. 4th. Between 1942 and 1945 the air war changed. In 1942 I had a > >pilot > > > who finished his 25 missions tell me he had never seen a plane shot down > >by > > > anti aircraft fire. All we had to worry about were the fighters. On my > >first > > > mission in 1944 I saw the squadron 15 seconds ahead of us lose 7 planes > >to > > > anti aircraft fire on their bomb run. There was not one fighter in the > >area. > > > There were many crews in late 44 and 1945 who flew their 35 missions > >who's > > > gunners never fired a shot at enemy fighters, but we had very heavy > >losses > > > from 88 MM and 105 MM anti aircraft guns. Now you know why they dropped > >one > > > waist gunner. Come to think of it. They didn't drop him. They just > >removed > > > him from the crew. Saved parachutes that way. > > > Best Wishes, > > > Jack Rencher > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > > --__--__-- Message: 7 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?FRANCISCO_QUI=D1ONES?= To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Radio Operators Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 21:04:33 -0400 Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Great information, how many B-17 were sent on this mission? THANKS ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin Pearson" To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 2:51 PM Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Radio Operators > They also did away with radio operators in some ships in some groups in mid > and late 44. Here are the MACR for six Forts from the 91st BG(H), 324th BS, > lost 16.8.44, enroute to the Seibel Aircraft works at Halle. Note, no Radio > Operators were on board. > > MISSING AIR CREW REPORT > 16 AUGUST 1944 > > (1) B-17 43-3800 91STBG 322NDBS (FIGHTERS) > CRASHED NEAR LEHNA MACR 8181 > (P) 2ND LT. RESSE W. LINDSEY KIA ROCKY RIVER, OH > (CP) 2ND LT. ALBERT J PERRY KIA LaGRANGE, GA > (N) 2ND LT. CLAYTON B. BAUGH KIA GROVE HILL, AL > (B) 2ND LT. LEE G. BRATCHER KIA HILLSBORO, TX > (TT) SGT. JOHN C. CRABB KIA OKLHMA CITY, OK > (R) > (BT) SGT. JOHN V. BUXTON KIA MIAMI, FL > (RW) SGT. ROBERT L. SCHRECENGOST KIA BEAVER FLLS, PA > (LW) SGT. CLEO H. GATES KIA TYLER, TX > (TG) SGT. LEWIS C. MORGAN POW ELKHART, KS > > (2) B-17 44-6126 91STBG 322NDBS (FIGHTERS) > CRASHED AT CHARTES MACR 8185 > (P) 1ST LT. JOHN L. LESLIE KIA NORBERTT, PA > (CP) 2ND LT. JOHN E. SAVAGE KIA TURLOCK, CA > (N) 2ND LT. STANLEY KOSS KIA BROOKLYN, NY > (B) F/O EARL W. DONLEY KIA ELIZABETHTN, PA > (TT) T/SGT. JOSEPH H. GODFREY POW LONGVIEW, TX > (R) > (BT) S/SGT. IVAN F. DOYLE POW CURTIS, NE > (RW) T/SGT. JAMES I. MIDDLETON POW HENDERSON, KY > (LW) S/SGT. DOUGLAS BUNTIN KIA LONGBEACH, CA > (TG) S/SGT. LOUIS KOS KIA ERIE, PA > > (3) B-17 TXS CHBBY-THE J'VLL JKR 42-31634 91STBG 324THBS (FIGHTERS) > CRASHED AT KITCHENBERG MACR 8184 > (P) 1ST LT. HALSTEAD SHERRIL KIA FLUSHING, NY > (CP) 2ND LT. FRANK J. GILLIGAN KIA KENMORE, > (N) 2ND LT. WILLIAM M. PORTER POW SAN ANTONIO, TX > (B) 2ND LT. NICHOLAS J. WEBER POW ALLISON, PA > (TT) SGT. VERNON E. BAUERLING KIA LITTLETOWN, PA > (R) > (BT) S/SGT. ENRIQUE T. PEREZ KIA BLOWETT, TX > (RW) S/SGT. JOSEPH R. MORRISON KIA FORT WAYNE, IN > (LW) RICHARD J. MUNKWITZ POW DETROIT, MI > (TG) SGT. CHESTER W. MIS POW LA SOLLO, IL > > (4) B-17 43-38012 91STBG 324THBS (FIGHTERS) > CRASHED AT WITZENHAUSEN MACR 8180 > (P) 2ND LT. VINCENT A. FONKE POW BREESE, IL > (CP) 2ND LT. FRED W. VAN SLANT POW OAKLAND, CA > (N) 2ND LT. ROBERT W. SIMCOCK, JR. POW BURLINGAME, CA > (B) 2ND LT. HERBERT CARLSON POW BROOKLYN, NY > (TT) S/SGT. RAYMOND V. PRANGE POW PORTLAND, OR > (R) > (BT) SGT. CHARLES S. BRUDO POW SEATTLE, WA > (RW) S/SGT. WENDELL O. MEENACH POW INDIANPOLS, IN > (LW) SGT. WILLIAM J. WEAVER POW CONNERSVILLE, IN > (TG) SGT. WILLARD M. HOLDEN KIA SABIN, MN > > (5) B-17 LASSIE COMING HOME 42-31673 91STBG 324THBS (FIGHTERS) > CRASHED AT DEIDERODE MACR 8183 > (P) 2ND LT. LEONARD F. FIGIE POW > (CP) 2ND LT. DALE W. WHITSON KIA > (N) 2ND LT. FREDERICK SEIBEL KIA > (B) > (TT) T/SGT. WALTER L. CARPENTER POW > (R) > (BT) SGT. FREDERICK D. BALDWIN KIA > (RW) SGT. EDMUND J. MIKOLAITUS KIA > (LW) S/SGT. WALTER SALO POW > > (TG) SGT. JOHN F. WALLASZEK POW > (NG) S/SGT. HARLON B. WILLIAMS POW > > (6) B-17 BOSTON BOMBSHELL 42-39996 91STBG 324THBS (FIGHTERS) > CRASHED AT MARSHAUSEN MACR 8179 > (P) 2ND LT. JOHN V. DUNLAP POW ATLANTA, GA > (CP) F/O JOSEPH J. CATER KIA YONKERS, NY > (N) 2ND LT. HUBERT B. CARPENTER POW PITSBURG, TX > (B) > (TT) SGT. VINCENT M. BEACH KIA REDONDO BEACH, CA > (R) > (BT) SGT. ARTHUR B. MANCINO KIA YOUNGSTOWN, OH > (RW) SGT. JOHN W. BARCLAY KIA HOUSTON, TX > (LW) SGT. FRANK J. SIMONE KIA EDGEWOOD, PA > (TG) SGT. ROBERT M. PASTER KIA MAPLE HGTS, OH > (NG) SGT. LESLIE D. ALGEE KIA PRESCOTT, AL > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > > --__--__-- Message: 8 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?FRANCISCO_QUI=D1ONES?= To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 21:10:46 -0400 Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com I have that video on Suiside Missions, The ball turret gunner and have your remarks open my eyes. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin Pearson" To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 3:08 PM Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA > I honestly tried to stay away from this forum for the last two weeks, but > found myself drawn to it everyday. You guys are addictive, you know it? > And for Bill Heller, I've got to apologize for going ballistic over the > Mexican comments - sorry. Enough said. > > I guess the one thing I absolutely hated about the History Channel's > "Suicide Missions - The Ball Turret Gunner" was the program made the ball > sound like the most dangerous of all positions, which we all know is > nonsense. And the stats presented yesterday on how many of each crew > position were lost by month is statistically flawed - something called > "systematically biased." If a Fort was mortally wounded and she was going > down, everyone still alive would try to get out, right? So when a ship went > down, the entire crew went with it - whether trapped inside, killed, or > parachuting to safety, or in some cases, death at the hands of the German > civilians. So to judge one position over another as being more dangerous is > a bit flawed when you consider crew losses by the number of a/c lost. But I > do appreciate the effort. It is very humbling for this non veteran to see > such losses, especially a couple of days before the 4th. > > A better way to calculate the most dangerous crew position, and probably not > even possible, would be to measure those men killed or wounded whose ships > actually returned to England. Anyone care to take a stab at this one? In > one of Freeman's books he gives it a go, but with several caveots - can't > remember which one now. And it seems I remember the waist gunners had the > most dangerous job on the Forts. Don't care if they could only fire at a 90 > degree angle to the path of the plane, 20 and 30 mm fired in front of the > plane or behind it had a tendency to rip through the guts of the plane and > go off just about anywhere, since many of the 20s and 30s exploded based on > time delayed fusing, however, the Naxis did use contact fuses as well. > > Just thought I'd add my two cents. > Kevin > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > > --__--__-- Message: 9 From: yelnifar@aol.com Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 11:46:11 EDT Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA To: 303rd-talk@303rdbga.com Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com --part1_120.133719c.28749443_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jack, The statistics that I quoted about bombardiers and tail gunners having the highest casualty rates didn't indicate whether or not they KIA and I don't remember the source. Sorry, Bob Finley --part1_120.133719c.28749443_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jack, The statistics that I quoted about bombardiers and tail gunners having
the highest casualty rates didn't indicate whether or not they KIA and I
don't remember the source.
Sorry, Bob Finley --part1_120.133719c.28749443_boundary-- --__--__-- _______________________________________________ 303rd-Talk mailing list 303rd-Talk@303rdBGA.com http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/303rd-talk End of 303rd-Talk Digest --part1_1e.1813790d.2874a2a3_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 4 17:54:08 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 12:54:08 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Waist Gunners Message-ID: --part1_a2.16587e48.2874a430_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 303rd BG(H) crews were reduced from 10 to 9 men shortly after D-Day by eliminating one of the two Waist Gunner positions. In 1945 most crews were reduced from 9 men to 8 men by eliminating the remaining Waist Gunner position The 303rd BG(H) always flew with Radio Operators. After D-Day Radio Operators sometimes manned one of the waist guns if fighter attacks made this necessary. Harry D. Gobrecht --part1_a2.16587e48.2874a430_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 303rd BG(H) crews were reduced from 10 to 9 men shortly after D-Day by
eliminating one of the two Waist Gunner positions.
In 1945 most crews  were reduced from 9 men to 8 men by eliminating the
remaining Waist Gunner position
The 303rd BG(H) always flew with Radio Operators.
After D-Day Radio Operators sometimes manned one of the waist guns if fighter
attacks made this necessary.
Harry D. Gobrecht --part1_a2.16587e48.2874a430_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 4 18:10:19 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2001 12:10:19 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA Message-ID: Actually, Jack, there were several Fortresses and Libs that made it back with two dead (and/or wounded) pilots. I'm at my office now, or I'd get you the plane names and groups. One of the 8th AF Medal of Honor winners was a TT/FE who flew his plane back with both pilots either dead or severely wounded. After the remaining crew bailed out over England, the TT/FE and the other crew member who stayed to assist, crashed the a/c after two or three aborted landing attempts, killing them both. So you see, SOME crew did make it back with two dead or incapacitated pilots. I think the guys name was Trumpeter. He's been written up in several books. One of the waist gunners who lived through that experience lives in my home town of Peoria, Illinois. Many crewmen from the tailgunners to flight engineers would go up when the mechanics were slow timing the engines so they could get some flying experience for just such an event. Of course, this was not sanctioned by the higher ups, but it did happen. If you want a few more examples, just say the word. I've got at least a dozen more examples at home. Trumpeter is the only one I know moff hand. Kevin >From: Jprencher@aol.com >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: 303rd-talk@303rdbga.com >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA >Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 19:10:29 EDT > >Kevin, No criticism but think a bit. There was probably not one plane that >ever flew home with 2 dead pilots, Dead headed? yes sometimes. Dead Drunk? >once in a while. Dead on their feet? Often. Dead wrong? Over half the time. >Dead headed? All of us or we would have washed ourselves out while in >Cadets. >But just dead? no Kevin, Like the ball turret gunner in the ball when it >made >a belly landing. because of a hydraulic failure. It just didn't happen. >Never >ever not even once. > Welcome back, Happy 4th You All. > Jack Rencher > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 4 18:29:47 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2001 12:29:47 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA Message-ID: Francisco: I have reams of information on Oskar Bosch. Tell me what it is you are looking for and I will copy and send to you. I even have two audio tapes (about 4 hours) of my two interviews with him. To answer your question, Oskar had 18 victories (they never used the word "kills"). Most were Russian, but there were a couple of Forts and Libs. I'm at my office now and can provide you the exact victories he had if you wish - let me know. Oskar had to declare in writing before each mission he would not return unless he had downed at least one bomber. That was part of being in the Sturmstaffel. They were instructed to ram if necessary. This he did four times. He also crash landed four times. On May 6, 1945, Oskar was flying a defence mission of Berlin and expended all of his ammo. He collided with a YAK-9, managed to bail out, but banged up his knee very severely. He was taken prisoner by the Russians (only because he was a pilot), escaped three days later, and walked 1,000 km back to his home town in Austria. Quite a remarkable guy. He still flys gliders on the airshow circuit. The show is called "Wings of a Man." The show has even been produced into a IMAX production. If you ever hear Oskar is coming to an airfield near you, go see him. What he does with a glider is not to be believed. Kevin >From: FRANCISCO QUIÑONES >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA >Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 20:57:24 -0400 > >Very interesting remarks by Oskar Bosch do you happen to know his victory >claims over our bombers and units he he was in any information appreciated. >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Kevin Pearson" >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> >Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 2:43 PM >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA > > > > Gordy: I've got to reply to your question about armor on Luftwaffe > > fighters. As I've mentioned before to you, I know a pilot, Oskar Bosch, >who > > was with VI.(Sturm)/JG 3, who flew both ME 109s and FW 190s, but at > > different times during the war. Oskar said that .50s would not >penetrate > > the armor underneath his seat on his FW 190 unless he was very close to >the > > origin of the shot and that the shot hit the armor at a perpendicular >angle. > > If these two conditions were not met, then the shot would graze of the > > armor plate, but, as he put it, "leave your ass really sore." > > > > What Oskar loved most about his FW 190s was, in his own words, "that big > > life-saving radial engine." His Sturmstaffel almost always attacked >from > > the rear. He said they would try to knock out the tail gunner first, >then > > the ball gunner, with the 20 and 30 mm cannons while sitting out of >range >of > > our .50s. After those positions were neutralized (he was always very > > careful not to say "killed"), then they would close at an angle to the >rear > > of the plane and slightly above the plane to avoid the waist guns. As >they > > closed in on the Forts, he said they would hunker down in the cockpit >and > > try to make themselves as small as possible. If the tail or waist was >still > > operational, that big radial would take the shots. He said those >radials > > saved his life on several occasions. Then they would aim at where the > > fuselage met the wing where the main fuel cells were located. He also >said > > on one sweep, his radial was hit and blew a cylinder head completely >off, > > but the engine kept turning and he made it back to Käten. > > > > Oskar was with a Sturmstaffel, a specially equipped "hunter/killer" unit > > that went after the bombers. Their tactics differed from those used by > > other units and their tactics differed greatly from the beginning of the >war > > to the end. When he was flying 109s early in 1943, he said they >attacked > > head on because our Forts didn't have the Bendix chin turrets as the >later >G > > models had. He also said they were quite "sensitive" to the firepower >of >a > > B-17 and wanted to minimize the amount of time exposed to our guns. >This > > was when Oskar was flying for 301/JG 3 "Udet." Later in the war with >190s > > and in the Sturmstaffel, their tactics changed because of experience and > > their mission of knocking down bombers. With a head on attack, closure > > rates were in excess of 500 mph, making only short bursts possible which > > were not effective in downing the sturdy 17s. Oskar's Sturmstaffel > > experiences were in mid 44 to early 45, before being transfered to >defense > > missions around Berlin. > > > > Hope this answered your question. > > Kevin > > > > > > > > >From: "Gordon Alton" > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA > > >Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 07:42:30 -0700 > > > > > >Hi Jack, > > > Heck of a nice reply to this question. I have read little snippets >of > > >why the second gunner was dropped, but you combined everything in a > > >nutshell. I know what you mean about shooting at 90 degrees. Every >tried > > >shooting a gopher from a moving truck, heading down the road at even 30 > > >miles an hour? It's impossible. I can imagine it at five times that >speed. > > >Some of the gunners must have got the knack of it though, didn't they? > > > My Dad was a tailgunner, and he told me a bit about leading the > > >fighters. Lots of times they would come from very high, or from below, >to > > >avoid the tail guns. That's when the ball turret really came into play. > > >When > > >the two gunners could work together, on an experienced crew, they could > > >assist each other by telling the other guy exactly what the fighter was > > >doing, and where he was heading, so the other guys guns would be ready >in > > >the brief one or two seconds he had to fire. Dad said he would be able >to > > >lead the fighter before he even saw it, if someone else knew what they >were > > >doing, and worked as a team. For instance, if the fighter was coming >from >7 > > >o'clock low, and unseen from the tail, the BTG would call him out, and >the > > >tail would have his guns pointed and ready. As soon as the guns in the >ball > > >stopped, Dad would fire, and the German would fly right through a hail >of > > >bullets, as he swooped up and away to avoid the ball and tail guns. > > > As often as not, though, the bullets would bounce off the armor on >the > > >bottom of the fighter. If the fighter was close enough, would the >bullets > > >penetrate the armor? Anyone have experience in that regard? > > >Teamwork. > > >Gordy. > > > > > >****************************************** > > >"Our freedom is not free. Please > > >remember those who fought to keep it." > > >Gordon L. Alton > > >129 Mariko Place > > >Salt Spring Island, BC, Can V8K1E1 > > >ph 250-537-5913 fax 250-537-5981 > > >gordy@saltspring.com > > >****************************************** > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > > >From: > > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdbga.com> > > >Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 6:50 AM > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA > > > > > > > > > > Bill Owen, The waist guns were very inefficient compared to the >turrets, > > >the > > > > nose and the tail. First there was only one gun out each side. 2nd > > >because > > > > they were firing basically 90 degrees from the direction of flight >they > > >had a > > > > tremendous lead in order to hit anything. We were traveling about 3 > > >miles > > >or > > > > so per minute. If we were being attacked from 3 o'clock or 9 o'clock > > >where > > > > the waist guns would be used, the gunner would have to aim about >half > > >way > > > > between the target and our tail. This made it very hard to hit >anything > > >with > > > > a waist gun. 3rd We didn't often get attacked from both sides at >once >so > > > > usually one gunner could turn from one gun to the other very easily. > > >Even > > > > when we had 2 waist gunners rarely were they ever both firing at the > > >same > > > > time. 4th. Between 1942 and 1945 the air war changed. In 1942 I had >a > > >pilot > > > > who finished his 25 missions tell me he had never seen a plane shot >down > > >by > > > > anti aircraft fire. All we had to worry about were the fighters. On >my > > >first > > > > mission in 1944 I saw the squadron 15 seconds ahead of us lose 7 >planes > > >to > > > > anti aircraft fire on their bomb run. There was not one fighter in >the > > >area. > > > > There were many crews in late 44 and 1945 who flew their 35 missions > > >who's > > > > gunners never fired a shot at enemy fighters, but we had very heavy > > >losses > > > > from 88 MM and 105 MM anti aircraft guns. Now you know why they >dropped > > >one > > > > waist gunner. Come to think of it. They didn't drop him. They just > > >removed > > > > him from the crew. Saved parachutes that way. > > > > Best Wishes, > > > > Jack Rencher > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 4 18:51:18 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 13:51:18 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Most Dangerous position Message-ID: Harry, Thank you for your report on the KIA that returned to Molesworth. I would think the Navigator and The Bombardier in the nose would be about equal but the 3 and 6 could be just a coincidence with such small numbers. What struck me as revealing was the 6 and 1 ratio of pilots and copilots. I can think of no reason why their risk of being killed would not be equal After thinking about this I reach a probable reason that is not to flattering to us copilots. If any crew member is killed or wounded there must be some damage, major or minor, to the aircraft. If one of the pilots is killed it falls on the other pilot to get the damaged bird home. It appears from your study that that us copilots were not very successful in this calling. I suppose it is not surprising when we realize that most copilots had no, zero, not any 4 engine time when they were assigned to a crew. Some I'm sure had no multiengine time at all. A majority of the crews that were lost went down on their first 12 missions. This tells us something but 56 (59) years too late. Thanks again Harry (One of us two) Jack Rencher From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 4 18:51:18 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 13:51:18 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Most Dangerous position Message-ID: Harry, Thank you for your report on the KIA that returned to Molesworth. I would think the Navigator and The Bombardier in the nose would be about equal but the 3 and 6 could be just a coincidence with such small numbers. What struck me as revealing was the 6 and 1 ratio of pilots and copilots. I can think of no reason why their risk of being killed would not be equal After thinking about this I reach a probable reason that is not to flattering to us copilots. If any crew member is killed or wounded there must be some damage, major or minor, to the aircraft. If one of the pilots is killed it falls on the other pilot to get the damaged bird home. It appears from your study that that us copilots were not very successful in this calling. I suppose it is not surprising when we realize that most copilots had no, zero, not any 4 engine time when they were assigned to a crew. Some I'm sure had no multiengine time at all. A majority of the crews that were lost went down on their first 12 missions. This tells us something but 56 (59) years too late. Thanks again Harry (One of us two) Jack Rencher From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 4 18:51:42 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 13:51:42 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA Message-ID: <24.15d096a8.2874b1ae@aol.com> simply ,regardless of numbers all suffered and war is hell to each individual From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 4 21:55:42 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Bill Jones) Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 16:55:42 -0400 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Most Dangerous position In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > .... What > struck me as revealing was the 6 and 1 ratio of pilots and copilots. I can > think of no reason why their risk of being killed would not be equal After > thinking about this I reach a probable reason that is not to flattering to us > copilots. If any crew member is killed or wounded there must be some damage, > major or minor, to the aircraft. If one of the pilots is killed it falls on > the other pilot to get the damaged bird home. It appears from your study that > that us copilots were not very successful in this calling. This statistic struck my curiosity as well, and as you mentioned, it is probably just that these are way to few observations to draw any conclusions. However I did think of two possibilitys for an explanation, although I have no idea of whether it makes any sense. The thing I was thinking was perhaps it had something to do with the right to left high to low arrangement of planes in the formation. Ie I was wondering whether perhaps with the formation flying at an angle, that EA fighters might prefer to come in from the high right front rather than the left, since they'd have fewer planes that could shoot at them from that angle? Another possibility might relate to who was flying the plane at the time of the injury. Ie if the pilot were flying, and was hit, wouldn't the plane be more likely to go out of control for a while, so that the co-pilot would have to recover from a dive or something rather than just flying the plane. Whereas if the co-pilot was hit, and the pilot was flying, the pilot would just continue to fly, and wouldn't have to recover from an emergency situation. This came to mind, because I have a narrative from the pilot who flew with my father on his first mission. The narrative said that they came into some flak, and he heard my father report on the intercom that he had been hit (apparently a minor injury), and by the time he had a chance to look over, the engineer had already started down to give first aid. Ie the pilot was so intent on flying that if it wasn't for the intercom, he wouldn't have noticed, and would have just flown on. However, if the pilot had been hit, it seems much more likely that the plane would get out of control. Just a couple ideas. However I'm sure that the real reason is that there were just too few observations to get any significant statistics. Another comment though. The suggestion that you can't conclude anything from the planes that went down (since the whole crew went down) isn't quite right either. I think that a large factor relating to the relative safety or danger of the various positions has to be how easy it is to bail out, not just how likely one is to get hit. I would think that some of the stations might be harder to get out of in a hurry or in a spin. Because of this, I think the overall KIA statistics including planes that went down are quite realistic with respect to the danger associated with each crew position. ************************************** *Bill Jones N3JLQ Sweden Maine * * wejones@megalink.net * * http://www.megalink.net/~wejones * * TVRO HAM RADIO WWII/B-17 SPACE WX * ************************************** From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 4 22:05:14 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Duke Drewry) Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2001 16:05:14 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA Message-ID: Kevin, Mr. Bosch indeed sounds like quite the man and surely an interesting = person to talk to.. I hope he has written a book of his exploits. Just = the part about hiking 1000 km (I think that's over 600 miles isn't it) = only 3 days after severly banging up a knee is remarkable. I've never = been there but it doesn't seem like Austria would have very friendly = hiking terrain even for a healthy person. Then again, it seems that all = our ancestors accomplished feats we would never think of attempting. If = there is such a book could you let us know?=20 Thanks, Duke=20 From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 4 23:34:07 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 18:34:07 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA Message-ID: <80.c96c65b.2874f3df@aol.com> Kevin, Thanks for setting me straight on the other flying crew members. From the time we started training I tried to teach other crew member to fly at least well enough to land the Bird if Goering and I were both out. I thought the Bombardier would be the best prospect, but it didn't work out with him.(He has a son and grandson who are now airline pilots) The Navigator wouldn't even try. The Engineer did pretty well. He never quite landed it without me helping him a bit but he got close. The Ball turret was a washed out cadet and I found why very soon. The tail gunner took to flying like a duck. He was a farmer and understood machinery. I think he and the engineer could have got it down if they could have found the airport Needless to say I am very happy we never found out. We got it home as scrap metal a few times but we always all walked or ran away from it before they pushed it off the runway with a bull dozer. I lie a lot. I never stayed around long enough. to see how they got it off the runway but it was always gone the next morning. Best Wishes, Jack Rencher From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 4 23:40:59 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 18:40:59 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA Message-ID: <89.8eaf759.2874f57b@aol.com> Kevin, I should have said,:It never happened in the 303 to the best of my knowledge. I don't pretend to know about the other bomb groups or B 24s. Bless you my boy, if it's not illegal now, Jack Rencher From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Thu Jul 5 00:33:19 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Maurice Paulk) Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 18:33:19 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Fw: WAIST GUN WINDOWS Message-ID: <000801c104e1$b5e1a060$64bb9ace@mjpmtman> That first one was a bleedin' mess--forgot to kill the HTML ----- Original Message ----- From: Maurice Paulk To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2001 12:01 PM Subject: WAIST GUN WINDOWS BILL RUNNELS & JIM WALLING----Thank you fellows! You might be interested in perusing a book I found hidden on my book shelf---FLYING FORTRESS - The Boeing B-17 --by Ernest R. McDowell - squadron/signal publications. On page 79 HALL OF FAME --Hell's Angels and Knockout Dropper are listed. PAGE 3 - illustrations - B-17 B - C- & D show tear-drop "blisters on the waist. B-17E -----F-1---F-15-DL & F-55-BO & F-75-DL show what appears to be a 3 section windo with deflector on the leading edge of the window. B-17G-1 shows open windo with deflector and a protuding waist gun. B-17G-80-BO & G-55-VE & G-25-DL shoiw a plain window - no deflector with a sqluare at the bottom center of the window. I bought this book in July of '92 when a B-17G and aB- 24 were in Grand Island. Think it was from the Confederate air force B-17--white triangle A - 231909 - R on the vertical stab.[found a photo.]---There are some real good photos showing the development of the 17 from the XB models on up Wish I could give you publishers address -can't find it anywhere. In '92 I paid $7.95 for the 8 1/2" X 11" paper bound book. MAURICE PAULK From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Thu Jul 5 07:36:30 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 02:36:30 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Most Dangerous position Message-ID: <17.18149ea1.287564ee@aol.com> Bill Jones, I read your thoughts and considered them carefully. The waist was probably the easiest to bail out from but really I see very little difference. The pilots was no doubt the most difficult, but maybe the tail would be in a spin. I've never been in the tail during a spin. Probably in a spin any position would be somewhat difficult to bail out from unless you were physically quite strong. Most all the pilots were in pretty good physical condition. This is an awful thing to say but I sincerely believe that a significant percentage of the planes that went down could have been flown home or to friendly territory with a different crew in it. No doubt the tail was a dangerous position especially during the 42 43 time frame when most of our losses were caused by fighters. When flak took over in 44 & 45 the tail was just as safe as any other if you didn't lose your oxygen. Thanks for your interesting observations. One more. comment I want to throw at you A few copilots were damn good pilots probably better pilots than their first pilots but with very few exceptions they had no training and/or experience in multi engine aircraft. I've had some of them tell me they flew their 35 missions and never shot a landing or made a take off. And few first pilots ever practiced unusual positions, flying with 2 engines on one side, 3 engine take offs, stalls, spins of even a loop or barrel roll. Enough said. maybe too much. Best Wishes, Jack R. From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Thu Jul 5 08:19:56 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (William Heller) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2001 00:19:56 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Most Dangerous position References: <17.18149ea1.287564ee@aol.com> Message-ID: <3B44151C.91EBC1FA@attglobal.net> Jack Rencher ... Enjoy your comments. Pilots who graduated from what was known as Specialized Four Engine Training in the B17, and who were slated to become First Pilots ... or, as the USAF now calls them, Aircraft Commanders ... DID practice many of the things about which you had your doubts. The Lockbourne Air Field, in Columbus, Ohio ... now known as Rickenbacker AFB, was a specialized B17 Four Engine school. I graduated from it. The first class to do so. We DID do two and three engine work. We DID do unusual positions. We DID do stalls. We DID do steep turns of the 75 degree variety associated with some of the unusual position training. We DID do Chandelles. AND, certain of us, when doing "solo" work, ie., with no Instructor on Board, DID spin ... AND loop ... the B17! Anent the discussion as to which crew position was more dangerous than any other, I am firmly convinced it was the luck of the draw. A Tail Gunner whose oxygen line was severed by whatever means, was merely a statistical casualty and a victim of COMBAT. Perhaps if he were in a waist position, a colleague could have noticed his actions, or lack thereof, and been of some help due to position in the aircraft at the time of the line going out due to damage. Yes, Fighters were tougher in the early times, but Flak always gained superiority when it was of the barrage variety and nothing could be done about it. We did, notice, however, with barrage Flak, the Fighters stayed away, as if on signal .... And, after one or two crew positions - I recall a copilot who was thusly killed - were actually wounded and or killed by Flak coming from below, MANY of the pilots SAT on their Flak vests! I sat on mine. Cheers, old Buddy! WCH Jprencher@aol.com wrote: > Bill Jones, I read your thoughts and considered them carefully. The waist was > probably the easiest to bail out from but really I see very little > difference. The pilots was no doubt the most difficult, but maybe the tail > would be in a spin. I've never been in the tail during a spin. Probably in a > spin any position would be somewhat difficult to bail out from unless you > were physically quite strong. Most all the pilots were in pretty good > physical condition. This is an awful thing to say but I sincerely believe > that a significant percentage of the planes that went down could have been > flown home or to friendly territory with a different crew in it. No doubt the > tail was a dangerous position especially during the 42 43 time frame when > most of our losses were caused by fighters. When flak took over in 44 & 45 > the tail was just as safe as any other if you didn't lose your oxygen. Thanks > for your interesting observations. One more. comment I want to throw at you A > few copilots were damn good pilots probably better pilots than their first > pilots but with very few exceptions they had no training and/or experience in > multi engine aircraft. I've had some of them tell me they flew their 35 > missions and never shot a landing or made a take off. And few first pilots > ever practiced unusual positions, flying with 2 engines on one side, 3 engine > take offs, stalls, spins of even a loop or barrel roll. Enough said. maybe > too much. > Best Wishes, > Jack R. From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Thu Jul 5 13:33:14 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Hollritt, Todd) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 08:33:14 -0400 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Oscar Bocsch (Was 303rd-KIA) Message-ID: <1F494A0E3B54D2118A9200805FFE8AF8016E5CEC@ner-msg06.wireless.attws.com> Kevin and all, I also have had the honor of seeing Oscar Bocsch perform for us here in NJ at the Sussex Airshow many times. It is truly amazing what he does with glider in a small section of airspace using loops dives and turns in silent flight. The Sussex Airshow takes place the last weekend in August every year, although many acts have disappeared over the years it's still the greatest "Little" airshow around. Also if you can still find a copy of "Warbirds Illustrated No. 31" titled "Air War over GERMANY" By the late Jeffery L. Ethell, you will find a few of Mr. Bocesch's personal photos taken of and by him during WW II. Page 11 has him sitting on the wing of his FW-190 in Leipzig in October 1944, you can really see the size of that radial engine Kevin spoke of! Another one on page 14 shows him stepping into his FW-190 - Black 14. And there is a group photo of him and his fellow pilots from 14 Staffel JG3 based in Gutersloh in December 1944. Just seeing the look of these guys on the ground is enough to say to yourself "glad I didn't tangle with these guys at 20.00 feet!". Todd (303rd A-637) From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Thu Jul 5 14:09:56 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 09:09:56 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Flak Suit Message-ID: <76.c9b70d8.2875c124@aol.com> To Bill Heller, Thanks Dear Friend for the information about command pilot training. If I was aware of this I had forgotten it. All I ever got was flying student gunners 8 hours per day 6 days per week. Half of it was at 150 feet so I learned to make steep turns without losing any altitude. When I started to answer your letter my computer went off and I lost it. I wanted to tell you I sat on my flak suit too, BUT I carried a spare one and wore it sometime too. like on the bomb run or when we went to Merseburg. All the aerobatic experience I got in B17s was when I was test flying or slow timing new engines and I thought I was violating all the rules in the book. I did a lot of this duty in the Yuma AZ gunnery school and quite a lot after I got in the 303rd. I also horsed around quite a lot when I took War weary B17s to the scrap pile at Kingman AZ after the CONFLICT was over and you were boring holes in the atmosphere with new airliners. We flew to Kingman with 2 man crews. One old copilot and one young engineer. Some of the birds were quite new like less than 50 hours. It made you sad. I took several old B17s there that were from our 303rd One was VK I Item in which I had flown 10 or 12 missions. That was real sad like putting your old dog to sleep. Best Wishes Bill, Jack Rencher From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Thu Jul 5 14:25:55 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2001 08:25:55 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Oscar Bocsch (Was 303rd-KIA) Message-ID: Todd: Thanks for the comments on Bosch! The last time I interviewed Oskar, he was 82. And he still had "Horrido," that fighting spirit. You can just see that spirit in his eyes, and hear it in his voice. Like the American crews that flew again Bosch, he is a living legend. Kevin >From: "Hollritt, Todd" >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: "'303rd-talk@303rdbga.com'" <303rd-talk@303rdbga.com> >Subject: [303rd-Talk] Oscar Bocsch (Was 303rd-KIA) >Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 08:33:14 -0400 > >Kevin and all, > I also have had the honor of seeing Oscar Bocsch perform for us here >in >NJ at the Sussex Airshow many times. It is truly amazing what he does with >glider in a small section of airspace using loops dives and turns in silent >flight. The Sussex Airshow takes place the last weekend in August every >year, although many acts have disappeared over the years it's still the >greatest "Little" airshow around. > Also if you can still find a copy of "Warbirds Illustrated No. 31" >titled "Air War over GERMANY" By the late Jeffery L. Ethell, you will find >a >few of Mr. Bocesch's personal photos taken of and by him during WW II. Page >11 has him sitting on the wing of his FW-190 in Leipzig in October 1944, >you >can really see the size of that radial engine Kevin spoke of! Another one >on >page 14 shows him stepping into his FW-190 - Black 14. And there is a group >photo of him and his fellow pilots from 14 Staffel JG3 based in Gutersloh >in >December 1944. Just seeing the look of these guys on the ground is enough >to >say to yourself "glad I didn't tangle with these guys at 20.00 feet!". >Todd (303rd A-637) > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Thu Jul 5 14:32:53 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2001 08:32:53 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Most Dangerous position Message-ID: Jack and Harry: Just a guess here about the 6:1 ratio of copilots to pilots killed. It's probably just the luck of the draw, but didn't the copilots move about the plane more than any other crew member - to help wounded, take walk around oxygen bottles where needed, replenish ammunition? Maybe because the copilot was moving about, he was more suceptible to being hit. Just a guess guys. Kevin >From: Jprencher@aol.com >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: 303rd-talk@303rdbga.com, 303rd-Talk@303rdbga.com >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Most Dangerous position >Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 13:51:18 EDT > >Harry, Thank you for your report on the KIA that returned to Molesworth. I >would think the Navigator and The Bombardier in the nose would be about >equal >but the 3 and 6 could be just a coincidence with such small numbers. What >struck me as revealing was the 6 and 1 ratio of pilots and copilots. I can >think of no reason why their risk of being killed would not be equal After >thinking about this I reach a probable reason that is not to flattering to >us >copilots. If any crew member is killed or wounded there must be some >damage, >major or minor, to the aircraft. If one of the pilots is killed it falls on >the other pilot to get the damaged bird home. It appears from your study >that >that us copilots were not very successful in this calling. I suppose it is >not surprising when we realize that most copilots had no, zero, not any 4 >engine time when they were assigned to a crew. Some I'm sure had no >multiengine time at all. A majority of the crews that were lost went down >on >their first 12 missions. This tells us something but 56 (59) years too >late. >Thanks again Harry (One of us two) > Jack Rencher > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Thu Jul 5 14:45:39 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2001 08:45:39 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA Message-ID: Duke: Oskar was able to pilfer a bicycle immediately after escaping from the Russians. He rode it for less than one day when one of the tires blew. So, he took off both tires and rode it on the rims!!! He was about half way through Germany when a group of Russians took the bike from him, of course, he had already changed out of his Luftwaffe uniform, but was "very concerned" he would be detained, so he just gave them the bike. Then he hiked the rest of the way home on foot. I asked Oscar why did he fought to the very end, why didn't he just give up to the Americans like so many other Germans did? He said he was a patriot and it was HIS country the Allies had invaded and he would fight and die if necessary. He said the thought never occured to him or any of his other fellow pilots to just walk away at the 11th hour. As he said to me, "Kevin, what if it had been America? Would you have fought to the very end?" Another interesting point about Bosch from his interview is that had he not collided with the YAK-9 on 6May45, he and his girlfriend (now his wife) were going to fly to Austria in his FW 190. He knew the war was over at that point, but he was never willing to conceed defeat until the bitter and bloody end. What, you say, he and his soon to be wife in a 190? Yes, there was a radio compartment on the left side of the aircraft immediately behind the cockpit and they planned to remove the radios and put her in there for the trip. Kevin >From: "Duke Drewry" >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA >Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2001 16:05:14 -0500 > >Kevin, >Mr. Bosch indeed sounds like quite the man and surely an interesting >person to talk to.. I hope he has written a book of his exploits. Just >the part about hiking 1000 km (I think that's over 600 miles isn't it) only >3 days after severly banging up a knee is remarkable. I've never been >there but it doesn't seem like Austria would have very friendly hiking >terrain even for a healthy person. Then again, it seems that all our >ancestors accomplished feats we would never think of attempting. If there >is such a book could you let us know? >Thanks, >Duke > > > > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Thu Jul 5 14:53:38 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2001 08:53:38 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA Message-ID: No problem, Jack, I just hope I did not sound condecending in my reply. There is a 447th BG(H) waist gunner, Joseph M. Jameson, that lives a few miles north of St. Joseph who spent every minute he could trying to learn how to fly. First, he just wanted to learn to fly, and second, he had crawled into the cockpit of a B-17 at Rattlesden where both pilots had been killed by an exploding 20 or 30 mm. He said after he saw that, and thinking about what he would do if that happened to his pilot or copilot, the only choice was to learn to fly, because he sure as hell wasn't going to bail out over Germany if all four engines were still turning. Kevin >From: Jprencher@aol.com >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: 303rd-talk@303rdbga.com >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Fw: 303rd BG-KIA >Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 18:40:59 EDT > >Kevin, I should have said,:It never happened in the 303 to the best of my >knowledge. I don't pretend to know about the other bomb groups or B 24s. > Bless you my boy, if it's not illegal now, > Jack Rencher > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Thu Jul 5 18:52:51 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Tooley, Dave) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 12:52:51 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Oskar and ramming a plane Message-ID: List, In one of the earlier emails it said that Oskar Bosch rammed or collided with enemy a/c. How does one ram/collide and survive? Not just once, but four times? Dave Tooley From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Thu Jul 5 19:14:49 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2001 13:14:49 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Oskar and ramming a plane Message-ID: The first time he rammed a B-24 with his wingtip and took off one of the horizontal stabilizers on the 24. He chopped off the tail of a B-26 with his prop and the other two times I do not know. Kevin >From: "Tooley, Dave" >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: "'303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com'" <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> >Subject: [303rd-Talk] Oskar and ramming a plane >Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 12:52:51 -0500 > >List, >In one of the earlier emails it said that Oskar Bosch rammed or collided >with enemy a/c. How does one ram/collide and survive? Not just once, but >four times? > >Dave Tooley > > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Thu Jul 5 20:28:47 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 15:28:47 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: 303rd-Talk digest, Vol 1 #324 - 9 msgs Message-ID: <110.1e800d3.287619ef@aol.com> --part1_110.1e800d3.287619ef_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hey Guys, Some of the talks have been about flying skills and the training of other crew members to take over if necessary. This reminded me of a night flight Scotts crew made for training, I don't remember the details of why, but They put me in the tail to watch for other planes. I got very sleepy and called the pilot after awhile and asked him when we were going to land. He said look out side, we were going down the runway. I never felt the plane touch down. I asked Scott who was flying and he said our new pilot. "Irish" our flight engineer. Best landing I ever experienced in a fort. I had a good feeling that others could handle the plane as well. --part1_110.1e800d3.287619ef_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hey Guys,
Some of the talks have been about flying skills and the training of other
crew members to take over if necessary.  This reminded me of a night flight
Scotts crew made for training, I don't remember the details of why, but They
put me in the tail to watch for other planes. I got very sleepy and called
the pilot after awhile and asked him when we were going to land. He said look
out side, we were going down the runway. I never felt the plane touch down. I
asked Scott who was flying and he said our new pilot. "Irish" our flight
engineer. Best landing I ever experienced in a fort. I had a good feeling
that others could handle the plane as well. --part1_110.1e800d3.287619ef_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 6 01:01:05 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Gary Moncur) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 17:01:05 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] B-17F vs B-17G Message-ID: <3B449D51.13155.D3D73A@localhost> A former curator of the Hill AFB Air Museum (now retired) once told me that flying a B-17G was totally different than flying a B-17F. He said they were "like two entirely different planes." I know how they differ in looks, but from a pilot's point of view, was there really much difference in flying them? Thanks, - Gary - Webmaster, 303rd Bomb Group Association http://www.303rdBGA.com http://www.B17Thunderbird.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 6 00:18:39 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 19:18:39 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Oskar and ramming a plane Message-ID: Sturm Staffeln flew especially modified and strengthened aircraft for this specific purpose of ramming. Larry From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 6 01:33:05 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 20:33:05 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: Vol 1 #324 mes.#2 Message-ID: <12c.10047b4.28766141@aol.com> --part1_12c.10047b4.28766141_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To All, I went through B-17 school at Lockbourne in Columbus Ohio after I had already finished 38 missions (25 combat). I had a 2nd Lt. as my instructor. I had the same experience with C-54 type aircraft...after 280+ Berlin Airlift missions, I was sent to C-54 school at Great Falls. Seems the Air Force did everything backwards...I already had heavy experience before I was sent to the schools to train on such aircraft. Cheers..Bill Bergeron --part1_12c.10047b4.28766141_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To All,
  I went through B-17 school at Lockbourne in Columbus Ohio after I had
already finished 38 missions (25 combat). I had a 2nd Lt. as my instructor. I
had the same experience with C-54 type aircraft...after 280+ Berlin Airlift
missions, I was sent to C-54 school at Great Falls. Seems the Air Force did
everything backwards...I already had heavy experience before I was sent to
the schools to train on such aircraft.
Cheers..Bill Bergeron --part1_12c.10047b4.28766141_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 6 02:35:45 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 21:35:45 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] B-17F vs B-17G Message-ID: <103.5aaf2a0.28766ff1@aol.com> Gary, From my point of view as pilot there was very little difference in flying a B17F and a B17G. I would say there was more but very little differences between high time and low time planes, & engines, who made it, Boeing, Douglas or Vega. The kind of instruments in it. Sperry or Jack & Heinz and how much major repairs had been done like wing changes etc. I vote the Curator was wrong. Probably some others will disagree with me. I hope Bill Heller and Harry Gobrecht do not. Best Wishes, Jack Rencher From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 6 03:33:16 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Dick Smith) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 19:33:16 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] B-17F vs B-17G References: <103.5aaf2a0.28766ff1@aol.com> Message-ID: <001201c105c4$03f373e0$70f833cf@richards> Jack: I agree I flew 35 missions in 1944 June - Oct. Flew both Fand G models . Then after the war I flew B17 in the 3171st Electronics Research Sqdrn out of Griffis Afb in Rome N.Y. Flew on Cloud seeding and Atomic Bomb Research and many Electronics missions Every B17 I ever flew was a great Aircraft. "Spider" Smith ----- Original Message ----- From: To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 6:35 PM Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] B-17F vs B-17G > Gary, From my point of view as pilot there was very little difference in > flying a B17F and a B17G. I would say there was more but very little > differences between high time and low time planes, & engines, who made it, > Boeing, Douglas or Vega. The kind of instruments in it. Sperry or Jack & > Heinz and how much major repairs had been done like wing changes etc. I vote > the Curator was wrong. Probably some others will disagree with me. I hope > Bill Heller and Harry Gobrecht do not. > Best Wishes, > Jack Rencher > From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 6 08:24:34 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (William Heller) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2001 00:24:34 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Oskar and ramming a plane References: Message-ID: <3B4567B1.21260B25@attglobal.net> The so-called ramming by the Luftwaffe was not like the kamikaze ... they did have a system and used old airplanes with which to do it. The ramming was done in such a manner that the pilot arranged to depart his aircraft just at the point of contact or a little before. It was very risky, but they did NOT do suicide ramming as a practice. Only if some pilot was nuts enough. It was NOT a planned system of defense. During ten years with Lufhansa and meeting and becoming close friends with a lot of the German aces against whom we flew ... I was able to glean a lot of info. Especially anent the ramming since it was a rumour that such was done. NOT SO. Only in the manner which I mentioned. WCH "Tooley, Dave" wrote: > List, > In one of the earlier emails it said that Oskar Bosch rammed or collided > with enemy a/c. How does one ram/collide and survive? Not just once, but > four times? > > Dave Tooley > From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 6 08:30:20 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (William Heller) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2001 00:30:20 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: Vol 1 #324 mes.#2 References: <12c.10047b4.28766141@aol.com> Message-ID: <3B45690C.7BAA00E8@attglobal.net> --------------4AD7C536DDCFAC2AAD5CF039 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hey, Bergie! What do you expect from a government run by a bunch of characters with room temperature IQs ... ? WCH Shaddoe2@aol.com wrote: > To All, > I went through B-17 school at Lockbourne in Columbus Ohio after I > had > already finished 38 missions (25 combat). I had a 2nd Lt. as my > instructor. I > had the same experience with C-54 type aircraft...after 280+ Berlin > Airlift > missions, I was sent to C-54 school at Great Falls. Seems the Air > Force did > everything backwards...I already had heavy experience before I was > sent to > the schools to train on such aircraft. > Cheers..Bill Bergeron --------------4AD7C536DDCFAC2AAD5CF039 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hey, Bergie! What do you expect from a government run by a bunch of characters with room temperature IQs ... ?

WCH

Shaddoe2@aol.com wrote:

To All,
  I went through B-17 school at Lockbourne in Columbus Ohio after I had
already finished 38 missions (25 combat). I had a 2nd Lt. as my instructor. I
had the same experience with C-54 type aircraft...after 280+ Berlin Airlift
missions, I was sent to C-54 school at Great Falls. Seems the Air Force did
everything backwards...I already had heavy experience before I was sent to
the schools to train on such aircraft.
Cheers..Bill Bergeron
--------------4AD7C536DDCFAC2AAD5CF039-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 6 08:32:08 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (William Heller) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2001 00:32:08 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] B-17F vs B-17G References: <103.5aaf2a0.28766ff1@aol.com> Message-ID: <3B456978.264FDAA0@attglobal.net> Jack Rencher ... Bill Heller does NOT disagree with you! The B17 was a B17 and the talk about it is truly funny to a pilot who had to take whichever damn airplane they assigned him to fly that day! WCH Jprencher@aol.com wrote: > Gary, From my point of view as pilot there was very little difference in > flying a B17F and a B17G. I would say there was more but very little > differences between high time and low time planes, & engines, who made it, > Boeing, Douglas or Vega. The kind of instruments in it. Sperry or Jack & > Heinz and how much major repairs had been done like wing changes etc. I vote > the Curator was wrong. Probably some others will disagree with me. I hope > Bill Heller and Harry Gobrecht do not. > Best Wishes, > Jack Rencher > From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 6 14:14:29 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2001 08:14:29 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] B-17F vs B-17G Message-ID: Hi Spider: I am very interested in the Forts you flew in the atomic research projects. Were you at Bikini when those two nukes detonated? Can you tell us more? One Fort that is still flying today was used in the atomic tests, but not sure which one(s). Is this on your web site? Kevin >From: "Dick Smith" >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] B-17F vs B-17G >Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 19:33:16 -0700 > >Jack: > I agree I flew 35 missions in 1944 June - Oct. Flew both Fand G models . >Then after the war I flew B17 in the 3171st Electronics Research Sqdrn out >of Griffis Afb in Rome N.Y. Flew on Cloud seeding and Atomic Bomb Research >and many Electronics missions Every B17 I ever flew was a great Aircraft. > "Spider" Smith >----- Original Message ----- >From: >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> >Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 6:35 PM >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] B-17F vs B-17G > > > > Gary, From my point of view as pilot there was very little difference in > > flying a B17F and a B17G. I would say there was more but very little > > differences between high time and low time planes, & engines, who made >it, > > Boeing, Douglas or Vega. The kind of instruments in it. Sperry or Jack & > > Heinz and how much major repairs had been done like wing changes etc. I >vote > > the Curator was wrong. Probably some others will disagree with me. I >hope > > Bill Heller and Harry Gobrecht do not. > > Best Wishes, > > Jack Rencher > > > > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 6 14:17:27 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2001 08:17:27 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] B-17F vs B-17G Message-ID: But Jack, Bill, and all else, wasn't there manual supercharging on the F models and automatic supercharging on the G. I heard the F was a bear to fly in formation because of the constant jockeying of the supercharger controls. Would this not be a major difference? Kevin >From: William Heller >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] B-17F vs B-17G >Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2001 00:32:08 -0700 > >Jack Rencher ... > >Bill Heller does NOT disagree with you! The B17 was a B17 and the talk >about it >is truly funny to a pilot who had to take whichever damn airplane they >assigned >him to fly that day! > >WCH > >Jprencher@aol.com wrote: > > > Gary, From my point of view as pilot there was very little difference in > > flying a B17F and a B17G. I would say there was more but very little > > differences between high time and low time planes, & engines, who made >it, > > Boeing, Douglas or Vega. The kind of instruments in it. Sperry or Jack & > > Heinz and how much major repairs had been done like wing changes etc. I >vote > > the Curator was wrong. Probably some others will disagree with me. I >hope > > Bill Heller and Harry Gobrecht do not. > > Best Wishes, > > Jack Rencher > > > > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 6 15:45:16 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 10:45:16 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] B-17F vs B-17G Message-ID: <117.146733a.287728fc@aol.com> Kevin, No the early Fs had 4 levers To set the superchargers just like we had 4 throttles to set the manifold pressure and 4 levers to set the RPMs. and 4 levers to set the mixtures. (also 4 generators 4 cowl flaps and 2 inverters 1 gear and 1 flaps) The G modes had the 4 supercharger levers replaced with a 2 and 1/2 inch, or so, inch dial that set them all 4 at once. It was nice and convenient but no big deal. Those 2 pilots had 4 hands you know. Flying formation in bombers is a bit different from flying formation in an air show like the Thunderbirds or Blue Angles. We were not jerking throttles open and shut like in the movies. As for me if I found myself falling behind one inch. (I lined up two rivets on my bird with one rivet on my lead) I would pick out my engine with the lowest manifold pressure and raise it one inch until I caught up. I did that with the throttle. We did not use the supercharger controls very much except right after take off and just before landing. Don't get me wrong. We did use them some during climb and loosing an engine or??? Best Wishes, Jack From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 6 17:06:04 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (William Heller) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2001 09:06:04 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] B-17F vs B-17G References: Message-ID: <3B45E1EC.BACC539@attglobal.net> Kevin Pearson .... A minor difference. Merely another manner in which to control - or try to - those $#!@&*(K#$% suyperchargers! WCH Kevin Pearson wrote: > But Jack, Bill, and all else, wasn't there manual supercharging on the F > models and automatic supercharging on the G. I heard the F was a bear to > fly in formation because of the constant jockeying of the supercharger > controls. Would this not be a major difference? > Kevin > > >From: William Heller > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] B-17F vs B-17G > >Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2001 00:32:08 -0700 > > > >Jack Rencher ... > > > >Bill Heller does NOT disagree with you! The B17 was a B17 and the talk > >about it > >is truly funny to a pilot who had to take whichever damn airplane they > >assigned > >him to fly that day! > > > >WCH > > > >Jprencher@aol.com wrote: > > > > > Gary, From my point of view as pilot there was very little difference in > > > flying a B17F and a B17G. I would say there was more but very little > > > differences between high time and low time planes, & engines, who made > >it, > > > Boeing, Douglas or Vega. The kind of instruments in it. Sperry or Jack & > > > Heinz and how much major repairs had been done like wing changes etc. I > >vote > > > the Curator was wrong. Probably some others will disagree with me. I > >hope > > > Bill Heller and Harry Gobrecht do not. > > > Best Wishes, > > > Jack Rencher > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 6 19:21:20 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2001 13:21:20 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] B-17F vs B-17G Message-ID: Jack and Bill: Thanks for your comments on superchargers. A very dear friend in his book describes how difficult it was to manually adjust the superchargers on his B-17Fs from the 91st. When he first arrived at Bassingbourn (January 44), he was assigned several old airplanes for his first twelve missions. He flew Wahoo – 428, an F model originally assigned to the 306 BG, Skunk Face (lost 20 Feb. 44) and Miss Quochita. He said adjusting the superchargers while flying formation was a real bear and ultimately told his Squadron CO he would not fly Wahoo because the superchargers left him behind the rest of the group on missions, and you know what that could mean. He wrote this book in the 60s. Not sure if his memory was playing tricks on him or not, but I was always under the impression the superchargers were a real pain. Thanks for clearing this up! Kevin >From: Jprencher@aol.com >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: 303rd-talk@303rdbga.com >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] B-17F vs B-17G >Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 10:45:16 EDT > >Kevin, No the early Fs had 4 levers To set the superchargers just like we >had >4 throttles to set the manifold pressure and 4 levers to set the RPMs. and >4 >levers to set the mixtures. (also 4 generators 4 cowl flaps and 2 inverters >1 >gear and 1 flaps) The G modes had the 4 supercharger levers replaced with a >2 >and 1/2 inch, or so, inch dial that set them all 4 at once. It was nice and >convenient but no big deal. Those 2 pilots had 4 hands you know. Flying >formation in bombers is a bit different from flying formation in an air >show >like the Thunderbirds or Blue Angles. We were not jerking throttles open >and >shut like in the movies. As for me if I found myself falling behind one >inch. >(I lined up two rivets on my bird with one rivet on my lead) I would pick >out >my engine with the lowest manifold pressure and raise it one inch until I >caught up. I did that with the throttle. We did not use the supercharger >controls very much except right after take off and just before landing. >Don't >get me wrong. We did use them some during climb and loosing an engine or??? >Best Wishes, > Jack > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 6 20:09:13 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2001 14:09:13 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Feild Orders Message-ID: In watching Target for Today again last night, does anyone know if there was any consistency as to when feild orders came into Molesworth. Seems like I have heard the orders could come in about anytime from late afternoon until after midnight. I know there were many, many variables that went into issuing a field order, but when did you usually find out you had been alerted for the next days mission - or did you? At other groups the flying schedule was posted as soon as the field order came in, but I have also heard some crews were awakened to find they were flying that day. Kevin >From: William Heller >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] B-17F vs B-17G >Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2001 09:06:04 -0700 > >Kevin Pearson .... > >A minor difference. Merely another manner in which to control - or try to - >those $#!@&*(K#$% suyperchargers! > >WCH > >Kevin Pearson wrote: > > > But Jack, Bill, and all else, wasn't there manual supercharging on the F > > models and automatic supercharging on the G. I heard the F was a bear >to > > fly in formation because of the constant jockeying of the supercharger > > controls. Would this not be a major difference? > > Kevin > > > > >From: William Heller > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] B-17F vs B-17G > > >Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2001 00:32:08 -0700 > > > > > >Jack Rencher ... > > > > > >Bill Heller does NOT disagree with you! The B17 was a B17 and the talk > > >about it > > >is truly funny to a pilot who had to take whichever damn airplane they > > >assigned > > >him to fly that day! > > > > > >WCH > > > > > >Jprencher@aol.com wrote: > > > > > > > Gary, From my point of view as pilot there was very little >difference in > > > > flying a B17F and a B17G. I would say there was more but very >little > > > > differences between high time and low time planes, & engines, who >made > > >it, > > > > Boeing, Douglas or Vega. The kind of instruments in it. Sperry or >Jack & > > > > Heinz and how much major repairs had been done like wing changes >etc. I > > >vote > > > > the Curator was wrong. Probably some others will disagree with me. >I > > >hope > > > > Bill Heller and Harry Gobrecht do not. > > > > Best Wishes, > > > > Jack Rencher > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 6 20:26:24 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2001 14:26:24 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Picadilly Commandos Message-ID: Not sure if any of you will admit to it, but I'm going to ask anyway. What was the going price for a Picadilly Commando? Did they barter for food, nylons, alcohol, etc.? And were they common only to London, or could they be found in the smaller villages around the bases? I've seen several of the training films and cartoons trying to prevent the spread of disease - were safe practices practiced? I know this is getting a bit personal (hell, maybe it will bring back a few fond memories). But if I was flying combat not knowing if today would be my last, I would have gone to great lengths to "score" as much as possible. Premarital sex in the 40s was really taboo, right? At least that's what my folks always told me and that nice boys and girls did not partake in such things. Do you think there was more talk and bragging than there was actual whoopi? Pardon the personal nature of this question, but I have not seen much ever written about this topic. I still do not know how you take thousands of young men in their prime, put them all together at aerodromes, and then ask them to be in control..... Kevin _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 6 21:30:02 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (William Heller) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2001 13:30:02 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Picadilly Commandos References: Message-ID: <3B461FCA.28E399EA@attglobal.net> Kevin ... I find too much of a non-important vein in your query anent "Commandos" but will advise that such practice is normal to those who pursue such extra prickular activities. As for pre-marital sex, it is just as taboo today as it was then.... only some people forget the Ten Commandments. They are still important whether you think today is your last or not .... I find the intitial query too gross to merit further reply. Cheers! WCH Kevin Pearson wrote: > Not sure if any of you will admit to it, but I'm going to ask anyway. What > was the going price for a Picadilly Commando? Did they barter for food, > nylons, alcohol, etc.? And were they common only to London, or could they > be found in the smaller villages around the bases? I've seen several of the > training films and cartoons trying to prevent the spread of disease - were > safe practices practiced? I know this is getting a bit personal (hell, > maybe it will bring back a few fond memories). But if I was flying combat > not knowing if today would be my last, I would have gone to great lengths to > "score" as much as possible. > > Premarital sex in the 40s was really taboo, right? At least that's what my > folks always told me and that nice boys and girls did not partake in such > things. Do you think there was more talk and bragging than there was actual > whoopi? > > Pardon the personal nature of this question, but I have not seen much ever > written about this topic. I still do not know how you take thousands of > young men in their prime, put them all together at aerodromes, and then ask > them to be in control..... > Kevin > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 6 22:20:26 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 17:20:26 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] RE: B17F vs B17G Message-ID: <115.14b6b29.2877859a@aol.com> --part1_115.14b6b29.2877859a_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I agree with Jack Rencher. I flew both the B-17F and B-17G and also several B-17E in B-17 transition training. There was very little difference in the flying characteristics of the B-17E, F & G. I think that the Hill AFB Curator is wrong. Harry D. Gobrecht --part1_115.14b6b29.2877859a_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I agree with Jack Rencher.
I flew both the B-17F and B-17G and also several B-17E in B-17 transition
training.
There was very little difference in the flying characteristics of the B-17E,
F & G.  I think that the Hill AFB Curator is wrong.
Harry D. Gobrecht --part1_115.14b6b29.2877859a_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 6 22:32:40 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Dick Smith) Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 14:32:40 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] B-17F vs B-17G References: Message-ID: <003b01c10663$2f8d4180$3df833cf@richards> Kevin : Never got out over the Pacific missions were to check for Atomic residue in the atmosphere mostly over the western states. Spider ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin Pearson" To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> Sent: Friday, July 06, 2001 6:14 AM Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] B-17F vs B-17G > > Hi Spider: I am very interested in the Forts you flew in the atomic > research projects. Were you at Bikini when those two nukes detonated? Can > you tell us more? One Fort that is still flying today was used in the > atomic tests, but not sure which one(s). Is this on your web site? > Kevin > > >From: "Dick Smith" > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] B-17F vs B-17G > >Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 19:33:16 -0700 > > > >Jack: > > I agree I flew 35 missions in 1944 June - Oct. Flew both Fand G models . > >Then after the war I flew B17 in the 3171st Electronics Research Sqdrn out > >of Griffis Afb in Rome N.Y. Flew on Cloud seeding and Atomic Bomb Research > >and many Electronics missions Every B17 I ever flew was a great Aircraft. > > "Spider" Smith > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > >Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 6:35 PM > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] B-17F vs B-17G > > > > > > > Gary, From my point of view as pilot there was very little difference in > > > flying a B17F and a B17G. I would say there was more but very little > > > differences between high time and low time planes, & engines, who made > >it, > > > Boeing, Douglas or Vega. The kind of instruments in it. Sperry or Jack & > > > Heinz and how much major repairs had been done like wing changes etc. I > >vote > > > the Curator was wrong. Probably some others will disagree with me. I > >hope > > > Bill Heller and Harry Gobrecht do not. > > > Best Wishes, > > > Jack Rencher > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 6 22:20:26 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 17:20:26 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] RE: B17F vs B17G Message-ID: <115.14b6b29.2877859a@aol.com> --part1_115.14b6b29.2877859a_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I agree with Jack Rencher. I flew both the B-17F and B-17G and also several B-17E in B-17 transition training. There was very little difference in the flying characteristics of the B-17E, F & G. I think that the Hill AFB Curator is wrong. Harry D. Gobrecht --part1_115.14b6b29.2877859a_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I agree with Jack Rencher.
I flew both the B-17F and B-17G and also several B-17E in B-17 transition
training.
There was very little difference in the flying characteristics of the B-17E,
F & G.  I think that the Hill AFB Curator is wrong.
Harry D. Gobrecht --part1_115.14b6b29.2877859a_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 6 22:30:28 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Dick Smith) Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 14:30:28 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Picadilly Commandos References: Message-ID: <002f01c10662$e17fdf20$3df833cf@richards> Kevin: I remember our crew officers walking in Piccadilly and being approached by a commando who said she'd sleep with any of us for 5 Pounds My Bombardier said he wanted to rent it not buy it. Enough Said Spider Smith ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin Pearson" To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> Sent: Friday, July 06, 2001 12:26 PM Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Picadilly Commandos > Not sure if any of you will admit to it, but I'm going to ask anyway. What > was the going price for a Picadilly Commando? Did they barter for food, > nylons, alcohol, etc.? And were they common only to London, or could they > be found in the smaller villages around the bases? I've seen several of the > training films and cartoons trying to prevent the spread of disease - were > safe practices practiced? I know this is getting a bit personal (hell, > maybe it will bring back a few fond memories). But if I was flying combat > not knowing if today would be my last, I would have gone to great lengths to > "score" as much as possible. > > Premarital sex in the 40s was really taboo, right? At least that's what my > folks always told me and that nice boys and girls did not partake in such > things. Do you think there was more talk and bragging than there was actual > whoopi? > > Pardon the personal nature of this question, but I have not seen much ever > written about this topic. I still do not know how you take thousands of > young men in their prime, put them all together at aerodromes, and then ask > them to be in control..... > Kevin > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sat Jul 7 00:04:48 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Gary Moncur) Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 16:04:48 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] RE: B17F vs B17G In-Reply-To: <115.14b6b29.2877859a@aol.com> Message-ID: <3B45E1A0.19001.69B4BC@localhost> > I think that the Hill AFB Curator is wrong. That's not the only thing he was wrong about - but that's off topic here. Thanks for all the input. - Gary - Webmaster, 303rd Bomb Group Association http://www.303rdBGA.com http://www.B17Thunderbird.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sat Jul 7 01:26:03 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 20:26:03 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Picadilly Commandos Message-ID: <11.16b16933.2877b11b@aol.com> Kevin, I'm glad I can't help you with this one. If I knew as much about B17s as I know about Picadilly Commandos, I would have cracked up and wiped out the whole crew about 27 feet down the runway on my first take off. Jack Rencher. From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sat Jul 7 19:39:00 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Fory Barton) Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2001 13:39:00 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Picadilly Commandos Message-ID: <000e01c10714$182b0f20$eebcf5cd@computer> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000B_01C106EA.2E40D800 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To quote a famous person," I never inhaled" but I was told that the = price decreased as the days after payday lengthend. Being enlisted(drafted) I was required to obtain passes from the 1st = shirt. He insisted that we grab a handful of condoms or no pass. Fory ( Kuyk's RO). ------=_NextPart_000_000B_01C106EA.2E40D800 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
To quote a famous person," I never = inhaled" but=20 I was told that the price decreased as the days  after payday=20 lengthend.
Being enlisted(drafted) I was required = to obtain=20 passes from the 1st shirt. He insisted that we grab a handful of condoms = or no=20 pass.
 
Fory ( Kuyk's = RO).
------=_NextPart_000_000B_01C106EA.2E40D800-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sat Jul 7 20:40:20 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Maurice Paulk) Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2001 14:40:20 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Aluminum Overcast Message-ID: <005e01c1071c$a93b5080$47bb9ace@mjpmtman> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_005B_01C106F2.BF265FE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable "ALUMINUM OVERCAST' landed at the Grand Island Nebraska airpot yesterday = to refuel. "on its way home from its last stop in Colorado Springs.CO . = to Oshkosh, Wisconsin."---Co-pilots Larry New of Tulsa, OK, Larry = Mullaly of San Antonio, TX.--Also Don Coester tech. engIneer, from = Pittsburgh.--- Passengers --Mark Vehlewald of Colorado Springs , who = works on airplanes and does air to air photography. and passenger Air = Force Major Rod Chack of Colorado Springs, CO. Excerpted from the Grand Island Indepoendent - July 7, 2001. Also = mentioned was www.B-17.org=20 MAURICE. PAULK ------=_NextPart_000_005B_01C106F2.BF265FE0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
"ALUMINUM OVERCAST' landed at the Grand = Island=20 Nebraska airpot yesterday to refuel. "on its way home from its last stop = in=20 Colorado Springs.CO . to Oshkosh, Wisconsin."---Co-pilots Larry New of = Tulsa,=20 OK, Larry Mullaly of San Antonio, TX.--Also Don Coester tech. engIneer, = from=20 Pittsburgh.--- Passengers --Mark Vehlewald of Colorado Springs , who = works on=20 airplanes and does air to air photography. and passenger Air Force Major = Rod=20 Chack of Colorado Springs, CO.
 
Excerpted from the Grand Island = Indepoendent -=20 July 7, 2001. Also mentioned was www.B-17.org=20
 
 
MAURICE. = PAULK
------=_NextPart_000_005B_01C106F2.BF265FE0-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sat Jul 7 20:49:53 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Maurice Paulk) Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2001 14:49:53 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] ALUMINUM OVERCAST CORRECTION Message-ID: <000c01c1071d$fe226ec0$47bb9ace@mjpmtman> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0009_01C106F4.14ADB5C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MAKE THAT ADDRESS www.b17.org -- Shows schedule!!!!!!!! FROM THE DIGGIN'S OF THE=20 MOUNTAIN MAN a. k. a. M. J. PAULK 205 W 12TH ST. WOOD RIVER, NE. 68883-9164 308-583-2583 ***************** EVERY ONE LIKES TO SEE ME! SOME ON MY ARRIVAL! MOST ON MY DEPARTURE!! ------=_NextPart_000_0009_01C106F4.14ADB5C0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MAKE THAT ADDRESS www.b17.org  --  Shows=20 schedule!!!!!!!!
 
FROM THE DIGGIN'S OF THE=20
          MOUNTAIN=20 MAN
        a. k. a. M. J.=20 PAULK
           = 205 W 12TH=20 ST.
WOOD RIVER, NE.=20 68883-9164
          = ;  =20 308-583-2583
         &nb= sp;  =20 *****************
EVERY ONE LIKES TO SEE ME!
SOME ON MY = ARRIVAL!
MOST=20 ON MY DEPARTURE!!
------=_NextPart_000_0009_01C106F4.14ADB5C0-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sun Jul 8 03:25:02 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2001 22:25:02 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re When do Field Orders arrive Message-ID: <20071-3B47C47E-3008@storefull-293.iap.bryant.webtv.net> I was Gp Communications Admin Supv. They arrived at all hours. I had a field phone beside my bunk and when the FO arrived i was one of the first to receive a call. I was responsible for peparing the filmsy. SSgt Steve Mudge From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Jul 9 02:30:57 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Todd Hollritt) Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2001 18:30:57 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: Picadilly Commandos Message-ID: <20010709013057.68241.qmail@web9304.mail.yahoo.com> > From: "Fory Barton" > To: "303rd - BGA" <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2001 13:39:00 -0500 > Subject: [303rd-Talk] Piccadilly Commandos > Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > To quote a famous person," I never inhaled" but I > was told that the = > price decreased as the days after payday lengthend. > Being enlisted(drafted) I was required to obtain > passes from the 1st = > shirt. He insisted that we grab a handful of condoms > or no pass. > > Fory ( Kuyk's RO). > When my brother and I returned to England with Dad (Alfred Hollritt 427th BTG)we visited London after our trip to Molesworth. We retraced Dad's route via the underground to Piccadilly Circus, he recalled how packed the platform was back in 1944, I guess Londoner's were still staying down there overnight. He retraced his steps to Rainbow Corner and the Regency Hotel just off the roundabout where his crew used to stay. He could not belive how much had changed, and of course there were no "Blackout" conditions on this visit. As a side note my brother first visited London in 1975, Dad told him to visit Piccadilly if he could and discribed how strange it was during the war, navigating in the darkness. My brother arrived via the same underground and to his amazement London had just suffered a power outage that plunged Piccadilly into a 1944 like darkness that night! Weird!! Now here it was 55 years after Dad's last visit and he still found his way over to the Red Cross at Rainbow Corner (A store front today), and the Regency (Missing the red carpets he recalled in the lobby) and then we bumped into the NEW Piccadilly Commandos located a block away! We joked... Hey Dad, could we be related to these girls somehow?! All he said was "London has not changed very much" and "Those Girls really knew how to tell your rank, and if you were with the USAAF!" We agreed at that point Dad was only a Staff Sgt. and most likely didn't get much when he traveled with his officers. :O I also read that they preferred dealing with US troops because they would be treated like ladies compared to the British soldiers. Talking with the "Boys" based at Molesworth today I think they are "Underpaid, Safe-sexed and over there" :) Todd (303rd A637) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Jul 9 15:12:05 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2001 09:12:05 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Picadilly Commandos Message-ID: Thanks everyone for your comments. I've read books that talk about the Commandos and they made it sound like all you guys when you went out on pass took part in these activities. I'm glad you have told me you have not. Again, thanks for answering this question. I have wondered about this for a long time and was a little uneasy posting it. Kevin >From: "Fory Barton" >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: "303rd - BGA" <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> >Subject: [303rd-Talk] Picadilly Commandos >Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2001 13:39:00 -0500 > >To quote a famous person," I never inhaled" but I was told that the price >decreased as the days after payday lengthend. >Being enlisted(drafted) I was required to obtain passes from the 1st shirt. >He insisted that we grab a handful of condoms or no pass. > >Fory ( Kuyk's RO). _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Jul 9 20:09:09 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 15:09:09 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Picadilly Commandos Message-ID: My pilot friend was in London one night and was asked if we wanted to go with her but we were both married and had no desire to go so she "unhooked " her arm and fadded it the darkness just like that! Clude Henning From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 10 01:24:20 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 20:24:20 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] help Message-ID: <45.8dcc18f.287ba534@aol.com> tell me where i can find info about bomb flight formations and locations of specific pilots in each formation of flights? thanks. spec From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 10 01:41:22 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Jim Walling) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2001 14:41:22 -1000 Subject: [303rd-Talk] help In-Reply-To: <45.8dcc18f.287ba534@aol.com> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20010709144122.008d9bd0@ilhawaii.net> At 08:24 PM 7/9/01 EDT, you wrote: > tell me where i can find info about bomb flight formations and locations of >specific pilots in each formation of flights? thanks. spec These are in the mission reports on the CD/Rom Jim Walling > From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 10 02:05:05 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 01:05:05 +0000 Subject: [303rd-Talk] help Message-ID: <20010710010505.LVGC13460.mtiwmhc22.worldnet.att.net@webmail.worldnet.att.net> The new 303rd CD has all of that information and much more. If you don't have one, get it. It is great and you will enjoy having the CD for future use.....Bill Runnels > tell me where i can find info about bomb flight formations and locations of > specific pilots in each formation of flights? thanks. spec > From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 10 03:25:00 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Bill Hoyt) Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 20:25:00 -0600 Subject: [303rd-Talk] just how close Message-ID: <003901c108e7$8579bca0$0dd60b3f@default> What would a 190 sound like on a close pass? And what might be considered a close pass. And at what speed usually? They must have gone by as a loud deadly blurrr. I cant imagine how you guys did your jobs, but then I guess that was part of your job. Thanks Bill Hoyt From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 10 05:58:45 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 00:58:45 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] just how close Message-ID: <11c.16d3a32.287be585@aol.com> Bill Hoyt. I never heard another Airplane while flying in a B17 that I remember. The B17 made too much noise, and we had helmets with ear phones in them and maybe metal helmets over that. I suppose a Close pass would be a matter of opinion. I would say anything closer than 100 feet would be pretty close if he was at the same altitude. Over or under us I would think 35 feet or less would be pretty close. Speed Anywhere between about 140 and 500 MPH. If one was coming from 12 o'clock the rate of closure could be close to 700 MPH. That would be one mile in just a bit over 5 seconds We could hear the flak bursts if they were close. Beside the boom the shrapnel hitting the plane sounded somewhat like being under a tin roof in a hail storm. Best Wishes, Jack Rencher From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 10 18:35:04 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 13:35:04 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] help Message-ID: i have it. forgot location of info ,thanks to all and gary From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 10 18:35:52 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 13:35:52 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Chute that burned Message-ID: Gary, You transposed it beautifully.I still can't read it without getting a tug in my throat. Jack Amram From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 10 18:39:20 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 13:39:20 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] just how close Message-ID: <45.8e4b1bf.287c97c8@aol.com> of course ,if you saw the red explosion of the flack you knew it hit. closeness experience in the weather formation of aircraft in limited areas ,with signalling flares to assemble on was often too very close such as seeing pilots in passing plane and recognizing them. From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 10 19:27:32 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 14:27:32 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: Picadilly Commandoes Message-ID: <82.cd3f75c.287ca314@aol.com> --part1_82.cd3f75c.287ca314_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Similar experience. Two of us were walking in daylight across Telgafer Square when this pretty young lady approached and ask the question. My buddy said no; "I came here to save your butt not buy it". He wound up with a slapped face. Bob Morris --part1_82.cd3f75c.287ca314_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Similar experience. Two of us were walking in daylight across Telgafer Square
when this pretty young lady approached and ask the question. My buddy said
no; "I came here to save your butt not buy it". He wound up with a slapped
face.
Bob Morris --part1_82.cd3f75c.287ca314_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 10 22:03:46 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Gary Moncur) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 14:03:46 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Chute that burned In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3B4B0B42.21238.19229CD@localhost> > You transposed it beautifully.I still can't read it without > getting a > tug in my throat. > Jack Amram > Jack is referring to the poem he sent me by Mackinlay Kantor entitled "One Chute Burned." Get some Kleenex, then read this: http://www.303rdbga.com/onechuteburned.html Thanks, Jack! - Gary - Webmaster, 303rd Bomb Group Association http://www.303rdBGA.com http://www.B17Thunderbird.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 10 22:23:42 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 16:23:42 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Chute that burned Message-ID: Wow, just read the poem. What a poweful sentiment! It reminds me of a story told by S/Sgt. Hubert B. Carpenter, 91st BG, 324th BS, on 1Lt. John V. Dunlap's Boston Bombshell, 42-39996, on the 16.8.44 mission to Halle. The 324th was attacked enroute to the target and six Forts were shot down, including Dunlap's crew. Carpenter was tailgunner on Dunlap's crew and when the fighters had set Boston Bombshell ablaze, Carpenter strapped on his chest pack and jumped out of his rear escape hatch. Carpenter had done 30 with the 303rd BG at Chelveston, gone home for a month, then came back to be assigned to the 91st. Carpenter knew how to get out of a plane, his other crew members did not as it was their first or second mission. As Carpenter swung safely in his opened chute, he watched in horror as four of his crew bailed out of the waist hatch. Each pulled their ripcords immediately after exiting the plane. With the right wing on fire, each chutes slowly caught fire in the thin atmosphere, and Carpenter watched each as they plummeted to their deaths. Of all of the stories I have heard about the air war, this one continues to haunt me. I have visited each site in Germany where each of these four men hit the ground. (And I said a little prayer.....) QUESTION: How did you guys cope after the war with the horrors you saw? I really want to know. After visiting the places where these four men hit the ground, I continue to be haunted by these mental images. I have had nightmares, surely not anything like what you guys must have gone through. But how did you deal with it? Kevin >From: "Gary Moncur" >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Chute that burned >Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 14:03:46 -0700 > > > > You transposed it beautifully.I still can't read it without > > getting a > > tug in my throat. > > Jack Amram > > > >Jack is referring to the poem he sent me by Mackinlay Kantor >entitled "One Chute Burned." Get some Kleenex, then read this: >http://www.303rdbga.com/onechuteburned.html > >Thanks, Jack! > > >- Gary - Webmaster, 303rd Bomb Group Association > http://www.303rdBGA.com > http://www.B17Thunderbird.com > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 10 22:25:50 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 16:25:50 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: [303rd-Talk]For Gary Moncur Message-ID: Gary: I'd like to use "One Chute Burned" in the next issue of the Rally Point. Do you have an e-mail for MacKinlay Kantor, so I could write and get his permission to use his story? Kevin >From: "Gary Moncur" >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Chute that burned >Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 14:03:46 -0700 > > > > You transposed it beautifully.I still can't read it without > > getting a > > tug in my throat. > > Jack Amram > > > >Jack is referring to the poem he sent me by Mackinlay Kantor >entitled "One Chute Burned." Get some Kleenex, then read this: >http://www.303rdbga.com/onechuteburned.html > >Thanks, Jack! > > >- Gary - Webmaster, 303rd Bomb Group Association > http://www.303rdBGA.com > http://www.B17Thunderbird.com > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 10 23:38:37 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Gary Moncur) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 15:38:37 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: [303rd-Talk]For Gary Moncur In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3B4B217D.2049.1E9046A@localhost> > > Gary: I'd like to use "One Chute Burned" in the next issue of the > Rally Point. Do you have an e-mail for MacKinlay Kantor, so I could > write and get his permission to use his story? Kevin > Jack Amram sent it to me and stated that he believes Kantor is dead. He is (was) quite a famous author. Some of his books are for sale on the web. It was written in 1940something and Jack has had it for 30 years. The copy he sent me was from some unknown magazine. I don't believe you'd have a problem using it. You may be able to find some publisher contact info on the web. - Gary - Webmaster, 303rd Bomb Group Association http://www.303rdBGA.com http://www.B17Thunderbird.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 11 06:07:39 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Bill Hoyt) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 23:07:39 -0600 Subject: [303rd-Talk] just how close Message-ID: <005801c109c7$69210c80$10d90b3f@default> Thanks Jack, I never took into consideration all the flying gear and phones and stuff. Or rate of closure! Dang yer right sounds pretty dangerous Thanks again Bill Hoyt From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 11 21:56:30 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2001 16:56:30 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] just how close Message-ID: <125.181fd4f.287e177e@aol.com> --part1_125.181fd4f.287e177e_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bill, On my first mission, we had four 190's attack our formation at 2 o'clock level. Fortunately, we were a replacement crew that arrived at Molesworth without a pilot who had been killed in a B17 crash in Ireland, so we were assigned to a pilot who had already flown 17 missions with another crew. Bill Heller will know who was. Anyway, I as bombardier had seen these 190's flying parallel to our course and called out there position on intercom. There were twin fifties mounted on a swivel in the nose of this older B17F but I couldn't get them in my sights as they made their pass, however our pilot, John Coppom, pulled us up so that all 4 passed directly under our nose so close that I could clearly see the four pilots as they passed. Unfortunately, they shot down the B17 on our left wing. Bob Finley, Bombardier 360th Sqdrn --part1_125.181fd4f.287e177e_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bill,  On my first mission, we had four 190's attack our formation at 2
o'clock level. Fortunately, we were a replacement crew that arrived at
Molesworth without a pilot who had been killed in a B17 crash in Ireland, so
we were assigned to a pilot who had  already flown 17 missions with another
crew. Bill Heller will know who was.
Anyway, I as bombardier had seen these 190's flying parallel to our course
and called out there position on intercom. There were twin fifties mounted on
a swivel in the nose of this older B17F but I couldn't get them in my sights
as they made their
pass, however our pilot, John Coppom, pulled us up so that all 4 passed
directly under our nose so close that I could clearly see the four pilots as
they passed. Unfortunately, they shot down the B17 on our left wing.
                                                                Bob Finley,
Bombardier 360th Sqdrn   --part1_125.181fd4f.287e177e_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Thu Jul 12 06:05:34 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 01:05:34 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] One chute burned Message-ID: Gary, MacKinlay Kantor died in 1977.He was primarily a writer of Civil War novels,among them,"Andersonville" and "Long Remember" about Gettysburg.I would think any copyright that may have existed covering his poem,"One chute burned" has long since expired and it's probably in the Public Domain now and usable without a problem. Jack Amram From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Thu Jul 12 04:28:57 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 03:28:57 Subject: [303rd-Talk] For what were these ribbons awarded? Message-ID: <200107120716.AAA22993@mail1.adobeactiveshare.com> --1_boundary MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I am writing this for Donald Ririe, younger brother of Lt. George M. Ririe, Jr. He was a navigator with the 359th Squardron from 1943 to 1944. His brother recently received his medals and ribbons but there was nothing to identify these ribbons. Mr. Ririe took them to a local Army recruiter but that person could not determine what these were awarded for. I am hoping that someone else had received these ribbons and can identify them. Typical Army snafu. I appreciate any help. Don Lancaster ______________________________________________ For a fun and simple way to share photos with friends and family, go to www.activeshare.com! --1_boundary MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: image/jpeg; name="photo (1).jpg" Content-Transfer-Encoding: Base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="photo (1).jpg" /9j/4AAQSkZJRgABAAEAlgCWAAD//gAfTEVBRCBUZWNobm9sb2dpZXMgSW5jLiBWMS4wMQD/2wCE AAYEBAUEBAYFBQUHBgYHCRAKCQgICRMODgsQFxQYGBYUFhYZHCQfGRsiGxYWICsgIiYnKSkpGB4t MCwoMCQoKScBBgcHCQgJEgoKEicaFhonJycnJycnJycnJycnJycnJycnJycnJycnJycnJycnJycn JycnJycnJycnJycnJycnJ//EAaIAAAEFAQEBAQEBAAAAAAAAAAABAgMEBQYHCAkKCwEAAwEBAQEB AQEBAQAAAAAAAAECAwQFBgcICQoLEAACAQMDAgQDBQUEBAAAAX0BAgMABBEFEiExQQYTUWEHInEU MoGRoQgjQrHBFVLR8CQzYnKCCQoWFxgZGiUmJygpKjQ1Njc4OTpDREVGR0hJSlNUVVZXWFlaY2Rl ZmdoaWpzdHV2d3h5eoOEhYaHiImKkpOUlZaXmJmaoqOkpaanqKmqsrO0tba3uLm6wsPExcbHyMnK 0tPU1dbX2Nna4eLj5OXm5+jp6vHy8/T19vf4+foRAAIBAgQEAwQHBQQEAAECdwABAgMRBAUhMQYS QVEHYXETIjKBCBRCkaGxwQkjM1LwFWJy0QoWJDThJfEXGBkaJicoKSo1Njc4OTpDREVGR0hJSlNU VVZXWFlaY2RlZmdoaWpzdHV2d3h5eoKDhIWGh4iJipKTlJWWl5iZmqKjpKWmp6ipqrKztLW2t7i5 usLDxMXGx8jJytLT1NXW19jZ2uLj5OXm5+jp6vLz9PX29/j5+v/AABEIAUoBLAMBEQACEQEDEQH/ 2gAMAwEAAhEDEQA/APqk0AJQAlUMDUgFMBuaAEzQAmaAEzSAQsKYCE8UgDcKYCFgO9IBN3agYm/j igQGTA60AJvFACGQAUAHmDFACeYKADzQtADfMFACGUDvQFxDKBQAecKAE80DgcUwE84UAIZgO9IB PNHrQAecKYCeaPWgA80AYoEHmAUIYu8UgAOBTEAb8KBhu5pCF3elMZq0CEJxQMbmgBCeKAG7qAEL UANLhaQDTLt9qAGGbHtQA0zepximAwzgd6QDWuAp4oAQ3A7GgBpufQ0DG/avegQhugO9ACfahjrQ An2rigBDdAd6BjTd46GgBDdc9aBCfavekMQ3VMQ03WO9AIabsj2oADdY46UAIbrHQ0AN+0kE0AL9 p9DQAfasYoAX7TQAfaKAHrPQMeJcUCHiSgQ8PigY8P0xxQAu6mK5r5xQMaTjpSAZytMBCce1ADd2 0cUgI2ftQBE0uO9AyFpdo60CIWmIoAiaYjjOKBkZnK+tAhpmx7UAMMxHGaBief70AJ51AhplPrSG Hm0wE87jrQAeaaAE8ygA82kAnme9MQeZz1oATze+aLAN8wetACebQAeYM0wE8ykACQetAAJMd6Au O8wetADhIBQBIsmKAJlfHHSmBKrgd6QEikCgCRWx1oAeDx0xTFc2M9qQyMnFMBC2BQAxjigCMtQB C7haQEEkoWgCs9wq96YFaS8ROrAUWC5Xe/iXncKaQrkLalEv8QpWFcibVYV/jFOwXIzq8K/xj86L BcYdZgXjeKLA2NOtwDP7wD8aLBcadctx/GPzosHMIdft1H3x+dFhXGHxDbKMeYv50WC4h8RWy/8A LRfzosFxh8S2y/8ALRfzosO43/hJ7Vf+Wi/nRYVxh8U2q9JVH40WC4w+K7Vf+WoH40WC5G3i61H/ AC1X86dguRnxjaqP9YBRYVyJvGtqv/LQUWHcYfHFov8Ay0H50WFcjPju1U/6wUaDuxv/AAnlrj/W D86NBajf+E9tem8UaDuxR4+th0b9aWgK5Knju2z97FLQNS7b+Mrd8YegepqWviGOUAg0BqaUGpK3 SgZdiud4HOKBllJMUgJFfjpRYDcagBhOPamBGzYoAjZsdaAIJJNo4pAU5p9meaBmXd3xjyemKAsc /qOtmEMKLhY5i/8AF00OQGp8wrGDc+N7lTw2Pxo5hWM+XxzdDo5FLmDlKknje8H8Z/OnzMXKiu/j S87SH86OYViJvGV7/wA9D+dF2FiI+L7wf8tCPxouwshh8WXo/wCWh/Oi7HZDT4qvP+epH40rsmyG /wDCT3h/5aH86LsqyEPiS8/56n86Ljshp8Q3Y/5an86Vwshp1+7/AOep/Oi47DP7duunmmi7FYQ6 1dD/AJan86LhYYdYuf8AnqaBEZ1acf8ALU/nTAYdTnH/AC0b86AEOpTY/wBYfzoAT+0Jc/6w/nSG H2+T++fzpiHLfP8A3z+dAyVL1x/EfzpAW4NQZcfMfzoGbem35JHzfrQgO30WfcgOc0DsdXYuQB3o Cxs274AB/CmBoRHAFAiden/16AN80wGE0ARnjvSAhf5aAK0pxQMzrliuaQ0jA1J2QH0oKSOO1idl VucUrjscNqt7tJ+ai5NjnZ7wseDikIrPM1MkrvMVPpQIiM+D1piGGbHegYnn+4oEJ53vQAecM9RQ AomA/iA/GgZJG+84X5j1OKQD3SRFLFCAOSSOlJlIr/aEzjePzqLorkl2AXUf98fnT5kHJLsTxI8y bovmHqDTTXQlprRkd0TZgeaduelVYgqm+i/v1VmA37fEv8dFmAhv4l6tinysA/tCL1o5WA06lCvV iKVgF/taBMfNT5WLQntNWgmnjhzjewGfSjlY762N8aeEUsLgEgdAKzZaMeLxYlpIVC5KnHWud10t DtWGdjc0v4qXNnKALaFogRwc5/PNP2yD6vZHuXh++i1PT7a9h/1c8YcDPTPauhPqc0o8rsdHb449 qog0IiFoEWF6df0pXA6A5qhDGOKAI2OKQELnFAyvJxzQBRuABmkUYmpIiqckAUtjSKb2PKPiVqX9 mWYiSRxPP/qto7DGfp1xWE52R6FChzPY8ZuNX1DzWy77QeSWz3rmdd9DpWC/mITqdwzbQ7n14NS6 8rXLjgVa9vwPT/C/hptY0e1uIrK+uC6Y3RQZBI4Peu6ErxTPEr03Co4vQ5vx74b1DQtQg32V7bxz R/IJosZIPOPzFdUI8y0OZ6M5c2eoMf3cE5+oq1Sl2JuQi1vQ2HjKtnjLYpOm10C4NZajyQECj1cf 41bpu3QUX3CKxvGbD3EKgdf3gqVT80W35DRZTbgDfIpz0AJzQ6cdrk69h4smTg3mQT2BNNwj3J94 6HwPosd54htLZ7i4ljlDBhBEWc4UngcelTKnFK6Zavseut8NdPa0mMmkeIpVCE5S2XkY92rldjaC tJWPEpNBkiJU217JuHaPbj+deRzLa59h/Z8nrGk/mCaA+wGO0uCeuC4H+f8A61JsqOCT0VP8T1D4 VeEYptPuJLzT7J0WbYPtl+sTLgAnj05Fejh37p4OZUHSqJNW9NSX4teF7Sy0G3ltIdHiH2hQRb34 kf7re444rupq7PGaPJP7PVeDJag4/vk4reMVtdEtELWUaHDXUeQOqxk/0qrJPcEmA02Fjn7RNIP+ mcdNwi1pcXqTR6BBtx9mvHIPGRVKK/lZNttRo0aKBsyWUuD3klC0uXl15SreYHS4UIKW0YGf45gf 60NaaJfePrcv6LDFbXttOsFgzwSK6pK7bTgjg89PxpJJq10KyufSn9jQRQ5GqeEowBz5Kh/05Nee 15m6a7Hzxrmm20GvXsSXdi0Mc7gOkJwwDHBAxXmzj72x9hQnH2ScppaLo/8AIzJLaJVHlywvjGTs 27f05rNLUcuVrSV/VWPevhm//FJ6eARwrA4/3mr06Xwo+axitWaX9aHeWzYFanGzRiOO+KZJZHTg YouB0BxTERmgBh6UgIXNAFaQ44oGilOcUijG1IP5btCFMuPl3HjNSzaFrpPY8I+IEOotPGmosyrA xaMdeCR3/AVwVHK9mfV4ajRnTdSD2OJeCO2lLbI4x2YkOR+FZSNl7l7WX4sek4jC5vJCx/uQDNL7 jaM7LSUvuPf/AIXYvfBlkuPFUqoXU+QwSLO4n5fm9x+Oa9Ch8CPksyusTJu+tt99jiPjNoMunarY zjTNXjgnjZVNzchixB56A44Yd676K00X4nmPXqeaS2gTDpYMeeTJdA5/LFdHJfaK+8j5kP2dCM/Z oh3wbgcfrSVuiX3jswCiNhut7KPjGGlLfyJqfhfQdhflhAdZbGPplVQt/MGqbts193/AEl5CtMrF SLuEMOy2+MfpQpX+1+AWt0EiuAykPdyFsdRCOv1zSUntdhY6X4fTXR8Y6XHaXGrNL5mMWfySMuDu AOePlyKiXwvcaPoi+0n7dbMraP4mvOPu3V4F/qa4mr9DWLs9z5mlttjlJNOuQh6B7kL/ADFeXzdE z7qNBw+Ol98rEL2HkksumoF7GW6yB+RFQ3pbX8i3h+qhFLzlf/I9S+DEVmU1MvH4fgceXg31wT/e +6N35/hXdQur6/efPZty+5ypLf4flvua/wAXbgW/hR40uvDM6STKHSzhJdRnOQwzjkAfjXdT0e54 D9DwtymA8dxZLjssRP8AMV13X8y+7/gEfIb9pDcG8ww6eVbgf4U1O6td/cIIpWGEMt9KN3ITjP8A Omm/NgSy6ex/eRafeNn+J3/+tQ6S6Q+9jT8yNbdANptYlPQbrkZ/nSSXZfeIbsVMFobID0MhP8jR t2GSQHyZkeM2Ue05+7vA/A5ob03QkrdD6lsdfjFsnn6/pAOOfJ0tyB9OBXnv1NUvI8A8a3NsPEmp LZarDLE1wzGSOy2ZJ5PBAxySK82pFKTsj7LC12sPBSnbTZRX52MBpVYlxcebtyv72LA/AVCv0Np1 bfab9V+R7T8Mp1m8L2u1txRnU8Yx8xP8iK7qXw2Pl8ff2zb62O+tsqAOmK6Dz2aUPQUxFlTtGMUA dAaYhjUgIm60AROfwoGVpaBlKfPSkMybvPNIpHI+JtGsNWtpku7cO+wiNwcFGxwffmspwUlZnZQx E6T916HgTQvbXLMjRrk8eUdzj6c/hXnSb7H1cW4v3Wr+W/yJY/NmbcG1E89l6Ulva6N4pvVqb+Z7 n8KtO+3eFYzBoOpXDwyukkkl+Ikc5zwPoR+tehQUZQufJ5opU8RZppNK19X/AFe5zXxv0d7ObS5b nQxaB1kVd2p+YWxt656da7qSj1X42PId+h5NLbiBgBZ2wU9Cbjd+oNbtJbJfeTuN8lFG8R2QHfMh J/LNVp5B6ki+SduZbCNvURscfpQpLa6+4VmOSZIhsF7C2f8AnnaA/wAwKpSa0UvwHbyELeSMi6n2 k/ww4B/DND5lqm/uJVh8cUsg/cyXwYDnbHtH86dpPuO6Ru+Cra9n8UaVCE1ZvMuUQhJthZScEA9B kZFTOL5bST+ZSfY+im8IyLGyjwu8gxz5+qjn64Fea4o1Uj5u1Kwjkvbjbp1rA3mMRG14CEGeB16V 5ctX1Pu6VBKCTjD1cv8AglNbRYiVlj0sYPe4Lfyas+W+juUoxp9af5/kz0z4NRW0cupEalodoxWM hXh85mGWztDfhnHqK7cPfU8TObWhZxe/w6ffc6b4pX9nN4Jv4RrNlJJlMomjsuRvH8WDjFelSbUt T5mWh4AZo4CAl4HH/TO2GP1Arq5rbP8AAn1Ddv5jnvmz0EcO0fzq0pP+YWiBIZZ1xJb30hxwZHx/ Sjkb0af3hew9bHyADPZQhTx+9ugCPwzRyKO6X3hr0GyRQufkh0+M+8xP9aT5baWQK/UhHlcJusgf 91qSku6+5hZodDKYJFH2q2Az/DD0/Sp57bS/D/gBY+ptE15rjS7SeXxLJFcvCrSJBov3WwMgHZ2O a4pXvoWjwzx/NHD4q1QwX1/Nul3FmshGxYgFuOMck9q8yqmpvY+3wVWcsNBc0vklbTbX0OYm3ct5 11gDAedP0FYxubTbTu+Zev6bnrXwqmL6AVLMdk7KNy47A16NH4T5nMr+2T8kekWp6VseWacPaqJL K9PSkB0BqhEZpARtlaAInGKBleQcUAUpxgEUhoybsYBpFHPakMA1LLR863BMkrRI6I3rGp3H2HvX mSPs4u75b/cvwHeRJPKqC31CVVwcs+P6VPN5/gdCoOWvs5P1ke0/CjThJ4Xdn8O2rJDcMhnu78xk nAPTjsa7qGse9j5fNKbpVkmrXW17mR8ZtOshZ6dPDZaLbujurRwahvdsgEEjPQY/WvRo2s1ZfM8a Se55G4RDteOxUdiHY/yNb6LTQhLQUbIAcyWSr6bC39P5072e6+4PIVbhUbMd/bL6eXbHP8qfP/e+ 5BbyJY9UcIUOoXvt5cIXP601Uls2wsRrfTF9v2rUJOeuMH+ZqbtbXsGnkL5cwO8R6jNjPfbj9DRy 9UmF+7NXwvbJc+ItLifT5pM3cYKS3ioD8w4JxwPftScYpfD+I/mfRixWVmClzovh63OPuzakCRx+ NcLRa8j588QywDWr2WOz0mNWuJPkjmLqPmPA56V5VRPme59vQlBUo25NEt7326mWb2NlAH9kq49I WJH6Vm46/wDBOmOKi1bmgv8At1noPwY1qOx1O7dtYgspvKCqbfTvMYgn5v4eMYFdeFtc8TN6jlTj HmTV+1v0R3XxH1i61DwVqCw+JdQkYKGMP9l+WrKGGcsB0xk9e1enT+I+YfofPS30jZj+13rHphI/ /r11c8npdkW9CN3njkznUZFHTJ24/nQ0+zC5E0Bcb1tJmP8AF5so5/lS5L7R/Eq9uo6B0AYPa2eV /wCesjHP5GnG22gvvJMiF9yy6fGM/dWMt/MGndLW6+4NOwrzRvyLq1U+gtz/AIU+e/2vwBadBi3J G1WuU4PX7Mv86XtHs3+AWPp3wzdXd54d06aXxBrlxK9vGXjtLMqASoyASAK4ZL3i0zx34iQS/wDC Z34A15tuwn7Sf3mdi9eT7fhivLrW59z7PLacnhoy5ZvfZ2W/Q5KdbhWBEd7FuGSZTuz7DjvjrWXO jplTlHXlkvnf9D1f4TKf7Bk+/wAXLfe6/dWu6j8J81mStVXp/memWi8AAV0nlM04V244xQSWVHFM DfP0piIwCOtIQxqBkT9OKARBIOtAynMmKQzLu4yAeMUikcxrcW+2lQkrvUjPQioaNKb5ZJnz/qKi CeWITqWUldiR8nHbOK86Ssz7FT50rSevS1vvZXFr5XXT8MeT5txgf0qU3vqa+xWi9nFPzl/wx7J8 HJIF0a5WS38Ow7Z/v38u9zlRwBnoMfrXbQuonzeaRXtFZJabJkPxstoW0mwu0ufDJeCcoI7EfOQw ySwycgbR+dehReu6PFkeNuyOM+bZL6kRnr9MYro5k9Lr7iWvITz9pKG9gGeMJbDp+VNTtpf8As+w gZkcFLy6JHQRR4/rTu+jbF9w6WNphvP9oSMB1kH+cUNOW6YaIZHDJKpR7e+wOmX/APrUKL2lF/eG ncBZmIhXsnC5/wCWswUfnS9nbeP4hfzL2kaWJ9VtIxHZQRvOql57sBUy2Mk7hgDvUyjpdJfeUtD6 VhFrENpm8FxtjHyo7gZ992K4WWkz588UJ5XiLUg93phU3UmWhh+Q/NwVAHT0ry6vxNH2eHajRi+d bLS1/v0MdlXdmO+gQ9wsBz/Ksrb8qOq6au6v3Rf+R6D8Gbpf+EhnQalfxSPasoNpZB2I3KcdDgcd a68O/e2PJzSTlQS5m9eqt36nofjqwvf+EV1R7a98WSyeSWZmUpHtHLbuem3NejTfvK9z5do+fmha cYeLU5DngE8V32bWqf3mdl3K72zoMS6fdBP+mk23H5ikovrH8R7bMPsflAutvaqo4/eTgk/rT5O1 l8wuAKZ3rJZQsO4Ut+hzQpK26+4S9B4u0gOw30JXplLQH+Yo51/N+A7EbTlPnXUJj2ISHFDl1u/u FqKtwswCLc3gz6RD/GlzN6NsdrH0j4LW/wD+EY0vK+KbjNrHgpMY0Pyj7vJ4rinfmZcbHlXxU3S+ LJ1fSNRjdI0WUXN4XZjjOckemB+FeXXa57bH12XUJSw6bhzLW2tl/VzjJIxDnZayQHkArOHJ9v8A 69Yo6501H4YW9JXf9dz0r4O3c4WWx8rbDky7mPOcAY/SuqhLoePmNBKCns9j2O1g4/pXajwGaEce 0CmhFhVwMYFAjaIxTENNICM0ARsuKAImTGaBlaWP0FAyhc2xOePpSGjmtfs5Us5njjLsqEhQepx0 qGb00m0j5xvFaW6aRpZlL53KqYHPXv0rznufYU0oxSbk9Pl5312IlRIl8x7exXB4Dzk5H0BqL33u aRUIK7UF82/yZ6/8F9Tgi029tHl0G3VZg6vJaPK5JXkAkjgbR+ddeH0TR8/m3K6kZprbZXX5i/Ga eH+woMa7Y3JW5BEKaaEI+VsncB79M9/avRotxZ4UrHjElyCfluYI14+WO35/Uf1rpT6qX4EW6WEW 43sdl5cbh/zxtwp/Q/WqUnLq/uB6EqtdDAJ1SRCexIyKr3u0rC0EnsXRt32K8z3DS8j68VLp9VH8 QTIvsoYfNaOH7BrgD9KXKn9n8RaipbquVe1sxzxvuD/8VQkk7NL7/wDglWZZs40iu4RMdNgjZwGb cXCjPJ4zS+HW6GkfUceq209orJrGi2+RnNpprHP4Nn+VcDLWh8/eMbyaTxNqf2rUYJG84jetls3r 0U4C8cYP415tWLcnofa4OtGFCMVU0t/Le3zsYDXBjfIvmK9/Ltv8QKzS8jpdVx1jUb+X+aO4+Et3 GPE/l/atXLSQMiLYxhGZsg44YcYFdFCykeXmtSVTD6uTs+u34HqfjG3vG8NamILTxW4+yyZMl7sG NpzkZOR6j0r06fxI+T0PnJtPaYeYun3rHqC8w4/Su7kT2i/vM79LkDW6KMSWcanr+8uh/jU2in8K +8qzG7BAcGPT1Xt85f8AkTQrLsFuw3zAh3R3FqhP8McJJ/Uf1oT6qX3L/gB8ixFcF0Km8ux2/d2o 59Oc1alJrVv7hXSGuLhCvlz6mwPqmP6mi0ltzBdeQeTOW3FdRJ688Umn2Yz6N8BWesjwppay6frk 4e3QqzamVQqRkYXHAxiuCfxMrQ8t+LdnHH4pMf8AY8dpIkChlkvxJuOSck8eoGPavNrv3tD6vLad 6F3FPXq7fgcb9kRQm2G33Dj9xMS/T69Kxt6nouC6KP8A269fzPYPgXpoaDU2liVWR02fNuOCDnP5 CuqhZ3PEzSEqajfS9z1tLZU4HFdZ4DJlQL2xTAd5Y+lBJrGmIbSGNPWgCNuMCgY0igCNlAoAjaMD gikUiKWyilQq6Aj0pNGsXY+UtV0S5s7qayl88KrmN18xdoIOCOvPNeY3Y+5hBSUbc1n5lFNOkwoE NrGFABxbu38xWTt/TN4Up9El/wBut/oeyfAu01N7XUoYdSFpFEyMqx6cpyzAg/MRkfdHFduFbs0f OZ5T5JQlLVu/Tl2t/maXxwstRj8KwC61W5u0N4myP7FGF3bW6nr0zXpYfm5tD5qVrHhL2F3GoYzT qMdNijH6/wBK7eWa6sz+RXFlcPyWuR6/vQAKlxb3v95d7DhZyOAJ7a4mA/vXOR6dhRyLqr/MV30G /wBjAD5YI1wOjSOT/Kn7Nfyr8QuOXRlU48m2PPcyGnyLsvxJ1LEehTydLe3zn5SsZP8AM0W9PuGX bTw7qQkUJY7lzyVslNNXXVfchaH1rBpt5FCirq8kagDhIIgB7dK8t37mqsuh4J8QPCWuXPi7UpHj vr3fINs8NoMMNoxyq8kDjjvmvNqqXO9D7nL6tBYWC9pbTbTTv5mAvgPxGPuafqxXGQDCw/8AZajl l2Ol18Otq34/8A7T4W+BdVsPE0c+pWWq20HksFk814wjHueB1AI/GuijGSlqjx80rUZ0WoVLvTq3 c9T8U+Hre78NalaL9ruZJbZ1RJLqZssVIHGfWu+KV1c+Vu0fOb/CzXx9zwzKp/2tzf8AswrtvS6J EajR8LPEmBjw+6kdP3QP48tT5qfl9wWY6P4U+KyeNHZQOg8uIf1oVSK6/gFi2nwo8UAj/iV3Cn/Y nhQfkK09rDu/6+QuUlX4Q+K2XabScD0+1oB+QaodSD0bY7MdD8EfErYH2ZVHcPcg/wAmqeekOzJ4 fgB4idv9RZj3Nw2f51PPSXQdn3PcvB/g+w8NeHLDT5bVJZoYgJWf5xvPJxnsCcD2rkm05NpDSfc4 jx/8N9Q8Ta815p9ppdvbJEscYKhXbGSSRtIzkn8AK4qtKU5XWx9Jl2Pw+Fw/JOLcm77L8LnMH4K6 8hAxpvTHDYA+uEBrL6vLueg84w/8v4L9LHoPgDwbJ4QsZ4550mnnYE+WMKoA4A49zXVSp8i1PBzD GLFSXKrJHU4x7VueWxQMUEjsUhGm3tVCEI20hkZpgNNIBhGBwMUANIxTGNNIaEpFo47UfhV4c1PU J72VLhZJ5DI6pLhSScnjHesXRg3c9SlmVenBQT0XkWIfhR4RTrpjN7m4k/8AiqXsYdh/2piv5/yO j8PeGdI8MrMNJtfswmxv/eM2cZx1J9TWkIRhsjhxOJq4i3tXexY1rTLDWrQ2moWyXMG4NsfpkdDW 0W07o5LHPf8ACBeF4zgaFZ+nzRg/zrTnk+orIevg7w7GQF0LT/8AwGQ/0o52OxInhnRoWymkWC/S 3Qf0pczFYsrpdjGcpZwD6RCi7CyJo7WGLGyFF+i4pczCxMigdAB+FK4FqIhetSWicycUmNETGpaN UxqjBpWHckWTb7VSMmNlckYziqJuVXGKZJERg9KYDdu2gQbMEZoGKBQIeg289KBliNivtSGSeYSO tSUmROaVirkbDHtSC43aM0yWNxQSLimIT/gJFArmpnnpxTENNIY0jHTimA0j2oAZtwDzmgBpG2kA hHIoGIRigpAPfilYdxy/LQO5IHxTJuNZ8HrTQiJqYhmO9AhMUAGDQAAYoAeKQx4bFAx26kNMCcUi riZoC4pbFNEjS2BTERtx3xQIbjmmISgBMUALjaPSgY4elAh4pDF3UDEJpDuNPFBNxOntQMKBCAUC Hc+lAGgBjjpTFcaflxigBpNAxvNADTQA00gEIxQMTp7UAJQAuaBhk0xBu96AGEgc0CEJoATPNMAH HtSABQAuaBjgfWgAz+FAwzSC4ZoAM0AJkUxDSeKAEoEGe1ACYC0ALQAoO2gBc0DFzSEJkL7UxhSA KBBTAT7tIBw6dKANAnHFMQzPc0DGk49qAGkYoAb90cUANPtxQAhOOtADTQAlAB93gcCgA6D0pANH y9+aYBTATp7UgFoAbzmgBfSgAzQAZ70DDJ6CkAvehgITigAzQAhJFMQdB6UAFACUAHegAPy0gDJA 4GaYC80DFzt4oEFIYtMQn0pAGO1MA/CkAuaLgaBGDTENNADSdvFADaQxpGKYCUCGt8uBSGJimA00 AJQAn3fagBDQAcUAJQA6gBvbFAAKAAUAHT2oAKBhnbSEGe1MAxjrQADtSAM9qYBQADjjOKAEoAD0 pAA6CmAtAC9qQCZpgOoAQccdKQBj0pgAGKQDsfhRqLQvk7famA3t6UgG0wGmgBKAGH5fagBD8tAx uR0oEJ92gYnegQhoGFADc80AFABk9KAEz6cUAKTigQg+WkMM460wD8KBi0hBQAmaADqKYC0gExTA X6UAIKQB2oAM4xxTAdQIKAEHvQMU8e1AAKQBzTAXGMUALilcRePHTimA0nHSgBv40ANNACE4HWgB vtQAhFADTQAn6UAIaAEoAPu0ANx2xQMOntQAenagQmNvTFABQAZoAOnbFIYUwCkAfTimAD3oGFAg waAAHFABn2oAB70gDoPSmAUAFAC0AGcYFIA+7TEOpDE+71pgLTAKQtC8enpQA2gBCNtADT6UDG+v agQ0nbQAhoAQ8e9ADSeKACgBpOKEAhOPagYUAIKAAdaBCfdz2oGGTQAAY4oEB70DCmAZqQDNAC0w Ez2oEFMYtIAoEB+XpxSGHagQD8qYxTQITNIBaYxDQAo+XvQIXtjrQAccUDHADHWjUWhcoASgBhOO lACE0AJnigBtADSfSgBCcdKAG/doAQ/LTATtSBCE7aADvQAZoGIWxQIPegAz+FACZoAWgYh44oAA MUAGaQCigAqgDOM+1IApgH3etIQGgYZx7UAGaBC5oGGaBBSGFMQoAFAxc9qACgTF/DFIC4flPpTA afl4oATO0cUAMNACE0AIaAENADTQIbmgYhJBxQAh6UwEJ5xSBAaAExtHBoAOKAAnFACZoABx7UAH 3aBhmgAzQAUIQZoGA4GOlAB2pAL+NMBaACkAnamAc0CFNAADSAPamAv3aAFGaAHUhgM8UxBgUhlo nFMQ0mgBpbHtQA0vTAbvA60gGGQLmmIQyBfagBPMHSgBvmCkAhkA6UxieYMUAHmCgQnmUhhvHrTA A4HekAm8KMZoAN3vQAu7HXigA3CgYA46UAG6gQAkUALnb7UDCgQvagAzwKAEzQAoOBQMM8UCFzQA UAGRQAvPagAoAX8aAFBPSgYDP0oELj0oGWC2PagQwvtoAjZ9tAERkxTERmbb7UhkTXGKYiNrjFAD TclelAxhusUCG/ajnrQMPtX4UCE+1dqAD7VxQMX7TQIPtXPBoAPtQ9aAFF3ip2GH2rHfFMQv2r3o GKLkdM0wFFyB3zQId9p7ZpDHfacHimAouQQOR+dAC+eOmaQB5465pgOEwHWkACUDkGmA4SgDikAu /wDCgBwfFAC78D0oAAcUAKDjigBc0AOzt4FACj3oAXNIZKx5piI2NAELHaKYETnHtQIhdsZ7UhkD tj2piIWfHHSgCMvx1oAYXxQAm/8ACgBNwxSAQP6GmAbzSsAB8e1MADEUgAPigYF8e1ABvNACh8UA Acr7UALvI6UAAkI70AKJDnigBfNK96AFExFADvPNADhORjNADhMR3oAkE59aAHrMRQBIsuOKAHq+ BQA8NgZ/KmA8NikA4HFADgce1ACjrQA7NAClto9KAIXl20xFaS4CDrQBVlv0TOWFAilNrMUecuBT sBnzeI7eP/loKdhXKkniq1U8yj86VkFyM+KrUf8ALQfnTsTzDf8AhKrX/nop/Gnyj5hf+Entf+ei /nRyhzCr4ltf+eg/OlyhzDh4ith/y0H50WC44a9bkffH50co7jxrdv03iiwXHjWIP74oSC4o1aD+ +KVh3HjUoem8UWFzDhqEQ/jAosO4C+iHRwKLDuPF5H2YClYVxftSdNwosO44XKjuKAuOE6juKAuA nX1osFxRMOmaLAOEoHGaAFEgU8GgY8SAd6QD1cLxQFyVHA70CJlamMlVse1ICVW7UAPB20AOBwaA HA4oAeKADj1FIYyRsZpiKsr4HWgRnXEu3OOKYGLfTlQecUAjmdTunjBIY0AcfqWpujH5z+dIDCn1 eUHiQ/nQIqtrE69JD+dFybEf9s3C9JT+dMYf23cr/wAtT+dF2FhRr10n/LUj8aV2OyHDxFdKf9aa d2KyJF8S3af8tD+dF2Fh6+Krtf8Alp+tLmCyHr4uu048w0+YViVfGV2v8Z/OncdiRfG12vG4/nSu FiVfHVyvVj+dPmCxOnj2de5ouFiZfH8o7kUcwrEy/EKQdzRdBZk6fEIjqad0FmTJ8RB3ai4rMnT4 hoBjdii6HqTp8Qoh1b9aLoWpYj8fwA/fo0HqWE8e2/8AfFLQWpZj8cWp/jFOw7luLxfbMR+8FLQL s0LfxJbtjDigdzSg1aNwMMBQMvRXit0NIZZSccUATI/YcUhIlDbcdqCh4P4UAPBx7UAOXpQBE9AF OY4oEZlycZpjMO+bg0COB8WeJLHSXEFxIVkcblCjPHrTUXa6EcDfa9bzklJPzo5WFzON4srYVgTS 5WiboQyEd6VguhhfHFA7kZmC8bhTswDzh60rAKJc96Bi7zSEJvNACeZQMPNpgAlNACiU+tACiYgd aAF873oAUTkd6QCicr3piHeeaQC/aCvQ00Av2lh0JoGOW7YfxUASpeMvc0ATx37qfvGkBettSdSP mI/GmM3tO1FiR85oA7PSLlmCndQKx1FnIQBk0xmtAxXFCAuxkrSGTp1FAEqnFAEgoAdRoBDK22mB SmbaMUAZd0+3NAjBv5Que1A0eKfE5TNrW4Mq7IlA55PJ7fjXdTpr2adznm3eyOLlsW++fNAYkBlX 5TW3sdL2Zjz2la5f0TS7ea4YPqccChM7pY3PPYHANZzpwS0f4A5SWy/E2LjSRBHuS8sJxj+GYqR+ BxWHKu6BSfZhbeGbyeJp47Hz4x1aCZSB/OhU7idRJ2/Q5KWynFw6MsygMeVGc11qg9+VidXpexHc 28sRO24Ixxgqcis3SitNfuL5pXvoaOkadNKss5vLcbQMLI+0n6D8KznBJaMfNK+xuWnhrVLxBJBA t0P+mEgYj8Kz9m+gnVS30ILrSr+2U+ZZXMQH3tydKTpPsNVF0ZzjNdA5SVT3wa29lBLcanK+iFia /dNwXdz2Oaaw99rMTqvroMNxfY4hfHcgZxSWGk9kN1kkhHvrqH/lk4+opfV2t0P2ytowOqSxnBDf TFL6v3D2qHDVW3YB9uRUexH7VDv7WZWAwB74o9ihqr2L9pcCSEO5AJ7VnKCTsVzMnQ+YfkIP41HI LmG3Lm2jLkD86pU7uwucqDUOOYz+FaewkNVIgNUVedhqXRkJVIlyKffGHAYA+1ZuLWhXMiVZR33A +4pcrDmQr38dsAxc4zTUR3L1h4mtbdgXc4p8jK5kdx4X8c6TPcxWjSSRvIQqll+XPbmjlYXR6jZf dFIpGtBxjnFIZeioAsJ8o9KQEy5oAeuKAHDHSgCCX9KA6FG4PFNAZV4cA9qBHO6i2M0DPHPG0ytr NwEkx8yhgkeT0A6161H+FFfock/iZzv2dzCzCB2OfmeCUEfiOcVoqd03y380yG7NK9vVG34Znmtk uHE+oRgbR8tosy554O41nOUrW1/Mzmlfp+RdkvEurld99Yhupa6sBH+B2r/n1rnbv1/AFFRW34kW oC0WMxpb6K/H34ZJRj/vpqTt5FQT8/wObgtHiBkS3mGf4oZxjFd0IJK/L90v+HHJ62v96K0ju8yk yXKgD+Mb81Ot7+9+ZWm2n5Gxo1yi70+0wKHIBMlmGAA98E/lWNWo3ZN/giXHrb8TpvtGnRQ/vbPQ LzIxlJZYm+pBP17Vk7eRmlJ7XRC+nOltNc2thNEFRmEtjdeaEHJGR/8AXpwjeS0+4cpWdm/vOImc s+1pcAc/vIRx+VdUpO+rfzX/AA5oo6aJfeK7Qohwlm56AguDSlJWt7r+TElrdXQ5I4oo1b7MC3Qm O4A/TmmlG1+VfKQ9b2Tf3DFgaSXIiuCvqjhsc+1EYXd1F/J3G3ZWbX3Ek4EeFzdD13xgf1qp8y09 4UVHfQZHGigEyj38y3zQm19pr5XJaT6fiIoiZ2ZpIFHXmLGfyFQnd3cvw/yRbSSsl+J0GmLALWOP 7XZRL1Ba2YjPpnbXLJ3k9fwIat0/E1xDaQQAmTw/cHGfmaQN9MZFFl3RFm3omjG1KzgeydvI05lk cACKfay9+AT04rSlFc3T77FPtqYv2CFgcW5BHQLcA1u4puyivvLtpq/wF/slIIgxgvI5GGAOMGtH DlVuRp+pnG38yZ1Gk+HxFp0Mlymrxsybty2QkTB6YO4e1ckoWk90Q6mtlYSaCPcsYnuCOgMmnKP5 ZrJr1+40i/JfeZ2vaXaraoy6jbyyNISYzA6EYBHdQP171pTgr7/eNSbe34nPtZLHjJgOf7r1q4Ja 3TNNWupf0O1lGqWnlEiQSoEj6HORjBqHBFRbPpixOAO1eYzpRrQHbigC9GcY7UXAsIc+1LYZMpoA eKAHjGP/AK1ICCUbc0wKFwcUxGPeNtzQBzmpSbc54o2BHiviF2l1u7dvOH70gOBwAOK9elF8sXZn LOSu1cy2SFi67bWUk5HluUI/OtrQk7e6/wDyX/Ii7SvqvxNrw5od5LDJLDpt86FsZtpuRj2xz1Fc tSnyv4fxFKqv5vwOkS0+wRky3OtxOzAFLvS1lQfiWP8AKklKPc5XJTf2fvsZ1yLa5gupJNY09W2N +6nsGjLcdtq4BP1FEPiWv3o11Wij9zOVkt4XXbGLAt6rMy/+hGuyUYPRcn4r8zSPMtfe/D9BBpsk C7hFMpP/ADxnBFU8Pyq6j90gVS73+9HTeFLCaK2lufO1W2Jcjf8AYfOjOMYzz7+lctSE4vVNfiY1 JxvbR/gXfluroIdYsWx0+12XlB/qQv8AMisLO+/3oa0WkfuY3xDp0MenSsLXRXdRgS2F8N3X+7uP 0q4wTlsn87FQck+v3HIRWM9spfy7yLPXau4V3RozgrpSXpr/AJDlOMna6fqQBN0oZ51UA9JYMZ/I GsrO/vSt6r/K5rpbRfcwukRyEQWfHddy5/OiWrteP3NEq61s/vBLJUj5ghbHUpcgf1p+zVtYxfz/ AOCCk09G18hILGV28wW0zAd45M4/SlCi91C/oxyqLa9vVEksd0nyAXy+qs3SqlCeyjL7wUo919w1 zJDFtSW6B9GjH880PnSsub+vmJct7ux2ejBbTT4Qt/qEG5A3z2CyL0zxknjrXG3JPqYy1ey+8ZLM bicBtTjUA/em0wKPyVTWfNrv+BSSS2/Ez/E0sUFvDGk+kTFictBC6suB34A5z+lbRa7r7iqafZr5 nO21sjrytqT33S7e/ua3hFd4/PQtya01/MVrUNOI47dGCnkRz5Jo9mpSsox+TDnaV239x2cdleRR x2ltp+oCWNQsnkamHDccjCjj6VzOKb0X4mXMlq3+Bp6dpd9ZR7jYeJ4GXq1u+5f1x601G3R/eZSn GT+JfcYXjHUvMlgj+0akNmcC/tI8rnr0Jz061tTlJdWvkmawjG2lvyOVuZY2jYrPbMRzgQFSf0qp TUl8S/8AAbfoaKLj0/E2vDUU0evWEUwlVvtCArKvHUf/AFqJKUINO60CLTaasfQNkMKBXjHca0Hy 49KQy7Hx24oEWY/akMlWgCRaAHUARSqaAM+5BHamIxL9SAcUDOT1YMoJzSA8Z1LcbuWZ4JIsktuZ vmyTkHH9K95Q5Yr3bWXfU4ea73M+S4DbHaS2bBxtkh2kj3wP61Mql0uaS+cf8kNQs9F9zOr8O2Vq 2mec1lps77i+F1IRSLjjox9vTvWE+RvRL5P/ADMZOala7+6/5EzC/YqtvbansUlgtvf+ao/IVlbo l+I7xWrf4C6xrl1b6HJbyatq6o4A8q7tFYHBBA3liQMD9K2pzqQeja+RnGEJSvaLOJ/tAzSAs9vL /wBdIQuR9QP61r7duXvST9UdXIraL7mJc3CMUH2W2BxgGKRun51NScXtGPyv/mEU11Z2ei3c2naD FJbWGr2u7JM9rqWxXwSPu7foOprKTs9Fb5nPJc0tXf5Gtpev3Fif9J1TWrQJggXVml0g6/3jx+VJ SmlbUlxhJ6Wf4GX4x8RRahGYI7vTL1SwIkGmi1c4PQkAdvelTkk7Nr5o0hBrW1vRnJTbY1G232k4 5hus5/DmuufL0ivlIuF+rfzRYgvXgi4n1GEnsUDgfqK3jOVNac6/EzajJ/Zf4EcWpuXkaS+Qt/08 WobP6Gs1iJXvKT+cb/5mjgrWS+52C61BZiF8zT5ASMkW5X+lKddP7Uf/AAG36BGm10f3i+ZEsOXt tNYY/hmYH/0Km5U+XVQf3glK+nMvuG2eCxkWyDbenk3WDj8zRSUL3UV8pW/MU5StZt/dcers92Ab a6YjnCXO79cULWXwv5SuD0W/4HoNxqk0CiCK08TWygbVR9S3YGMDA29K4uZt3d/vMFFeX3Fyy1uO CzXOo+ILU9f31hHcoM8jBY5/SqvJbXIajfp+Rxni/Wvt11Cp1Jp0ALBp9OjhIJ9dvX/69XTn3k18 johCy2X3mUrWnlgm7sHOPuyQOP5Cuv2lO3xRfrFhySvs18yO3jt52UFtNAdgu5mdduT/ACFZ81Pl bbi/ky3zJ2Sf4HZ6fYWUrPF9j0GbHyjbqDQkH2Ltg1xpR8jnk5rv+DLN9paQou3SbWLe2Bt1xGz7 YFS1Dol95UHLq39xyXiWGaO4jJs7uF9u7IuPNBGeMHHtW9OnK14p/JmsZrq/vRkrJI6GJppFdyAF miGD2+8elbc07crbXql+YrRvdJfI2/DNu6a5YKI5oV+1J8wkDL94Y7e1RUhy05e7p63RcZXktfwP frPoK8Y7TWg+UAUhl6L5aAJ0pASj5aAJB7UAPHSgY2RM9BTuIpTxEjpTAxr6E7TxQJnCeK76HTIH MjhWxwDVwpub0JclFHjMzief5IlyxJ/cEl8+or2FaTskvlucmsdW/vIpmkSFQ00qlR0nhzj6Gqbm o2bkvVX/ABEuXm0SOj0q6totMhj36NOcklZ7aRX69CwAH61xynfS6+4iUHd6P7zS0/RhelpE0eyu NpyPsepKhHPoxP8AL86lRT6IiU+Xq18jN8WRzJa+SLbWIlVsbZbwToh/ADnFaQg3Kyi/ky4Nbtr7 rHLLDFAhY3DKQP8Altb5/wAa6rcitdr1Vx/E72T9GQxWySyb99u3s+U/wrGMVf4l81Y0k30T+R1+ l6ImoC2SLTLKY7AGS3vcO34Enn8K55RTk9F8jJycerOjk065020SGKw8S2QIyUhuxJEevbAzT5bL RP5Mz5k92n6o4/XYII7cNPev57SfNFeQHJ4OTkA/z706e+rt6q5qtdlp5HPC0Ez5QQMB2WQr/OtV BSenK/wNeblVtSw1rOpEMENwreiThv5CtHS1tGNn5SFzdZP8B/2e6sVO430Z6YeLI6+9XapTVlzI m8Z9mVI1eSQs820A/wAcPH5CsveveUmvkVpbRBIiN8qSW5/2vJI/pSck3bmX/gP/AABpNLb8R5tk jhPFmc997A/zptRS3i/vJ95vqiSztxDcxO0EEhDg7ftAXPP1qXCKi21H7/8Agjcn3a+R1NloUl6/ 7qwtp8sf9XeYY/qa5lC/RGUqlur+41Wtb/SofJgstftHxjZDqA2/kFFVytbL8SE4vVtP5HI62moi 8BvpNQD+WMCcFyecd63pRmldc3yNLxasrGZNdTL8vmuQf71uBVynUvZt/ci4xj2X3j7aVBJFE8ls csASbc5X9KmdV8tr3/7dEodbfidZZ+XCh82fQpwF/wCW0UiEd+wBNct+7X3GT1eif3kkMNvezZit dDXA27fPdA3HX5mp79hu8V1MfxDaRi/KQaYIyiAH7NdiRW75B/H1PSuunRUo35L+jCM2l8X3ozYY 5Vcxs0tupx8s7HY3PRjxjvzVRhKLtql5vT5mraku/wAtfkdJ4E0g3uv2R8kxpE/mFopcj5RkAj64 /Os6yUaTlypejKptuVr/AHo92sotgAJya8c7DVgTAFAFyMbcYpAidBj2oAkWgCQdaAF4/wAiiwXJ nXFMCB4TQIoXFiXHApgeS/F/QGis47tpTHGDtwBnmvQwq5rowq6anj4TEgUFJdxAAH7snnrntXXb pv8AgZfh+JMsFxbuQUvoUxnCNvH5cZrdQnTekZJeTuZNprdP1VjsdLkit7GBTq6W4KBit/pW4DPP BCtxmuGo3zO7fzRk99En6P8A4Ydd3tiqrFjwxds68ssE0Z/HoBWd13X3DjB76r5mPrVhFZ2NuH0q 2812LrPYampBA7FctjqPTpWtGK3cU/R2NE3fST+aOenllkYBf7QVB1zJ5gH8q6velspW8ncuyW7V /Swklx5K+WJyexE1qufzqZ1GtOZ/OKFCK3svk2dvZLaf2dEbhvDVw+wblmEsMgPpxtB/AGuNtdWj Gz5tE18yxp/h175WubbQ7aeJGxnTdRwyf8BYk1Kin0Q5T5dG2vVGH42mmgNtayS6zCUU/udQiDbB x907jkceg6V0QcktOZfiOkk9dGc0joiYaaylPXEkTKR+IArZTSXxJ+sX/ka2f8r+TH2tstw27yLI gj+G5CH9T/SphCL1ai/nYcrx7/dcDbNNJtis5iFGD5NwHx+lV7O792F/SQX5VrL70S7LiyTA/tKI t0BXg/rWrU4LRTXzMYuL6pkMUmzLSXNwu4/8tIA1RFtbuS9Vc0er0S++w2S4DOM3UO3rlrbaD+Qq HO71n98V+iKUbLb8SxZujahbxpJpx+YZLRnaPqSPSpqTv7qlH7v+ALltG9n953xeyhtVzB4UuOMb WnkRyPX74xx64rldu6OdKV/tIoWWnRX0pEWj6ZOAfu2uo+WR9NzH+VSop9Ey5ScerXyuYHiWBrLU 5LdLC8twgUCM3ok2/KO4ArrjG0ElH/yYuDurt/gZkMMkQaQxahHjrs5H510KEoK/LJejE5xlpdP5 F3w+Gm1eAzz6hHtYspW0EzZAzwpPPIH61nL2ii2+b8wny2suX8jqdW1eSeRIZtYklTu02jxxlfyG TXG5Pq39xEElsl95as57SJPm1XQWzztutOlGcdM4QUX8/wACHFv7L+84/WZ4bvVJ5Ba6Qfnxi1ka NOMDIDHpxXTDkcUnyv70zdRaWjkvxMpI0SfBRIABhd8nmIfY/wCNHLGMtkvndfqWm+Xdv5WZ1/w/ YW+vxShUTdGQBASQ319OlKtDmhsvkEHZ9fme72kZCKSMe3pXi9TtRoxJtFIZaReKYEqjbxSAkXj2 oAetACgmkBZIxVAMIxQgGYFNCOP+JuiXGpeHCLK0Ny8UokeNSQ5XBztx1OSDj0zXfg6ip1Pe2MK0 OaOh4Xe+HbmZiEtJ2CD545oiQM854A7V7E1GS0f3/wBI5I3XQz5NAG4H7OkR9FeRP5g1HsactUl8 m1/mPnmt2/wPSLfQb+C1iMF1qFsoRSsbajHIPujA2Pj6e3vXA4tPc5+aLeqX3CHw/PteaXUZJiTl knsreUZ5zwGJH4YpWl3FzLZL8zkfGWkSmS3RLGyjjIOCllJHnp15Oa3o0XO9kvu/yNKc0lu/vOaT ShACEiRZT3jnZMfmK6FQSdlFX8m0bc76vT5EsWj3PmqEaXeWxhLlHyfxIo9k6euqflL/ADsLnTWu 3oegSaVq2ogC8nuVRVHzXOkRyLge6An/AD1rz/e6v8DC8I7L8WJLpliFaCSx8NyuFx5jrc27n65O M/h3qXHuVGTto396OP8AEWlfZbuEJAImCFs2t8sikZOMdx09a6aFNJOVvudjVSbVr/ejJNrdSvhz ehcY3PAGrotVb1crfeO8Ftb8hHhRf3cj2w46yWrKf0FTK+za+cRx7r8xqabDEh3JYsevE5U/lmly QS1UX82g5pPZsYummUh0t4yuekV2Mj+dZqlF6qK+UiuaS0u/uLEtnqG0LFHfgt0C3O4H9K097aN/ /AiFbd2+4QWF3bIMx6iD3DQBh7dTVLnirJy/Bh7st7FrwzFMNUWUNcqy7i2NPSYqMY+6eO4FYzcl B3bv6ImdrdLerOluLqSacLJqMEZ5G640VU/Pap/lXJd9/wACLJLb8SzJFYwwB2PhS6YdfMWeNj26 ZH8qLryElK/X70cDf2ySajOY4bHy952iGfAHsNxzit6cE1e0fvt+bOm7Str9xC9ptKxi1zzwFugc itnTjdJRX/gQKT1d39xr6DFPDqKQwWeqCbaQi298EIPrwvpkUqseWPKotf8Ab1zNu6u2vuOwt7DU oCZrj/hKIHcbzmPzgT6kkjP5VyrmW1zByi9NB8mqXkMIdNR1lQPu79Kh2lh7Z/z1ocp92ChDy+9n nmoTCS+neW4jkYueZbYKT9cDitlOyWv3xOuMU+n3Mg+RLjfuhX5cAwjcp/3gTxWjaUrpr5frcLO1 nf5nsfwc0uKbRZ7sxxPJ9qKh0XGMIvH6n868/FTbla50UYpLY9Qhtdg6YriNi0kWykMlCY7UCHqu 32oAeFxQA4DHtQMcF9sUAWSMUyRhXHtQMaV2+1NCDpirTEIFqkxDgq9CoP1FPmJsKYIG+9BG31QU czJ5URPp2nnrY25+sS/4Ucz7i5F2KFx4c0Wc7pNIspDjALW6n+lWqkl1GoRXQrf8If4ePXRLEfS3 Uf0q1VmtmHKhjeA/DEhBfRbUlehC4x+VP6xU/mF7OPYvzeGNJuFxLA7emZn4/Wp9rPuZfV6a2RAn hLTbdCsDTxg+kpJH4nNCrSE8PBmDrPwr0TWJxPdXN80gAUEyqcAc45X3rWOJmlYtUIxVkZbfBfQV z5d1eR+48vP/AKDWyxk+y+4PYxBfg5pEalRqN+T2LOvH5CqjjZxE6EWV5PgtYs27+1bg/wC/GrUf XZN3sP2CIn+CdrsxHqgT62inP60PGf3UCo26kP8Awo5FHGqW5PHWxAz+TUlioreCG6XZkEvwNuZR tGpWoUc/6t15/BqPrMOsReyktmXNL+DV9p9yJWu7aSNV2hFmmTP1waVTEwmrWMZUpW0Zvp4B1GGM EXLFl4C/bpCPr8w/pWCqxMnQmVLjwTq6tuKvOQON0kL/AF+9H/WqVSI1QnY4LUPhP4iM8zwaWu1n Zl3+QTgnvjFd6xFHltfX0X+RoqU+v6mcfhN4kXO/RFJ6cKh/k9SqtC2tvuKcZ9PzNLwz8K9Sgu5H 1HQQsWMAlGz9RtesasqP2bfd/wAEzmqlrK51Nz4EFvFttdNu07qIpZ0x+WenpXOnTMVGr1/IqQeD J7VSYl1W0l5JeK6m4/8AIVUuTuU/advwPP7vwtqzu81xDqbSOSzGSDcSfXkV6TcbJKZpFW+yUP7F WO6ZZpngkQBWHlJGfpjv29KduvN+X6B5WPc/hlo7aV4UhDsWM8rTDcgUgE4H16Zz7142Ma9q0tbH ZR+HU67bt9q4jcUdOKQx3TjpQIeARQA4UAKBQBIOlAWRYI7UwGkbfagBuOKBCYqgEFAhaq4gzikm FgJpiGNx04pjEHWi4Cii4Ds7e9FxWELYouOwxqLgM2807gIV/Ci4wxtouAY4ouIXAouMcv5UXESK 2KVxWHbqLisNZsdeKq4WIj7cUXGAouBKr7e+KQrCmTHei4WI3bPtRcaREw/CncCtPp9rOSZbaKUn rvQHNHO1sHKiXaEwoHA4x6Vky0KFqQFxt9qQxcfhQA4ce1ADqQxeB7UAO+lFkItmmIaBtGKBjSKY DdtAhDTASmSGe2KLjEz2oAQ0AABXFMBAaVwsGadwFNIBpBHtTATG2gAxSGIRimAuKADAoAXAouIc OKm4CVVxWE9sUXGJigBKdxC5pXAM4PpQAhOPagYw/WgBaVxjcfSkAfSkMPu0gFxxigBwG08UAKKA H96ADbSDUu4pgMxtNMBuKQCYx7U9gG45oATG3jpQIQj8KYwIGKQhAMUwEoAKACgA+77UAJ09qADF ACY9qADGMY4oAO/WgLBigAHy0AHfigAHy0BYMbegouIKBjeKdwCkAhOKADmgBO3NACZ4oAKQwAA9 qAFAxSAUDmgBQPSgY4YX2osIUCkAtAF0jHtTYDO/0oAQ0ANx68UxCYx04pDGkbe9MAIoAQgjigQm NtAxMUCCgAwaBiYAzQAY2mgAA/CgAwFoCwYx0oAQDHtQAYxgZoAKBCYouMKAA+1ADehx0oAOntQI KBiH5Rj0oEBoGJjbwaADFABikAuKADGKAFxxQA4DFIBQuPamAoG3FADvwosBcNIBvpTDoNNMBGpA hD2o6ANp9AEP3RQHUWkAwdKYCUgEFPoId6UAxp+7SY0B6U+okKfvUDQ00IAPQUPcBE+7+JoAd3FI Bo/rTQB2FIA70xhSEhB/SmAn8NIQgpgBpDE7j6UAKfu0AxD0quodAHSl0AUUkADrQAo60dQHDpQI U9RUlAKoSHUwP//Z --1_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Thu Jul 12 14:33:53 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 09:33:53 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] For what were these ribbons awarded? Message-ID: <39.17766e5e.287f0141@aol.com> Hello Don: I've looked up the ribbons on my books / charts, etc., and curiously do not find those two....but mine is not complete. You might email a query to MEDALS OF AMERICA at MEDALS@USMEDALS.COM. They if anyone should have your answers. Good luck, Cheers, Bob Hand (B)Fink's Crew, 303/360 -35M. Bob Hand, Sr. BOB HAND DESIGN 6197 97TH Ct. South Boynton Bch., FL 33437 (561) 731-3382 Web: http://aerodreams.anthill.com/ From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Thu Jul 12 14:41:28 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 09:41:28 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] For what were these ribbons awarded? Message-ID: <8e.18390fdf.287f0308@aol.com> Hold the phone, Donald....further examination of my files on ribbons, etc., reveals that the top ribbon was the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award and the bottom ribbon was the Air Force Longevity Service Award. Again, check with MEDALS@USMEDALS.COM and they can provide you with the actual medals if you desire. Glad to shed some light on the subject. Cheers again, Bob Hand Bob Hand, Sr. BOB HAND DESIGN 6197 97TH Ct. South Boynton Bch., FL 33437 (561) 731-3382 Web: http://aerodreams.anthill.com/ From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 13 05:20:14 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (VONDRA BURRELL) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 23:20:14 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Thanks Message-ID: ------=_NextPart_001_0001_01C10B29.34D937A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello, my name is Lance Burrell. I am a 38 y/o Nurse Practitioner who h= as an interest in WWII in general, aviation in particular. I am interest= ed in learning, keeping alive the memory, and passing this along to my ch= ildren and others. I was a Navy Corpsman attached to the Marines, inclu= ding service during Desert Storm. My interest began when I was in the 3r= d grade and has gotten much deeper as I get older. Thanks for what you all did for me. I appreciate it very much, and will= not forget! Lance Burrell ------=_NextPart_001_0001_01C10B29.34D937A0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello,  m= y name is Lance Burrell.  I am a 38 y/o Nurse Practitioner who has a= n interest in WWII in general, aviation in particular.  I am interes= ted in learning, keeping alive the memory, and passing this along to my c= hildren and others.   I was a Navy Corpsman attached to the Mar= ines, including service during Desert Storm.  My interest began when= I was in the 3rd grade and has gotten much deeper as I get older.
=
 
Thanks for what you all did for me.   I = appreciate it very much, and will not forget!
 
Lance Burrell

------=_NextPart_001_0001_01C10B29.34D937A0-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 13 08:14:26 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Bill Hoyt) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 01:14:26 -0600 Subject: [303rd-Talk] re: just how close Message-ID: <004e01c10b6b$7417af40$f8d60b3f@default> Thanks Bob, How did they come thru your formation, in single file or pairs or what? From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 13 13:24:55 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Bill Owen) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 07:24:55 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Thanks References: Message-ID: <000a01c10b96$d42b6c20$513f22d1@billowen> Welcome aboard, Lance. You will learn a lot by listening to these men who have been there and back. Ask any questions that you might have and you will receive some very good answers. I have certainly learned a lot of things that I did not know. Regards, Bill Owen ----- Original Message ----- From: "VONDRA BURRELL" To: <303rd-Talk@303rdBGA.com> Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2001 11:20 PM Subject: [303rd-Talk] Thanks Hello, my name is Lance Burrell. I am a 38 y/o Nurse Practitioner who has an interest in WWII in general, aviation in particular. I am interested in learning, keeping alive the memory, and passing this along to my children and others. I was a Navy Corpsman attached to the Marines, including service during Desert Storm. My interest began when I was in the 3rd grade and has gotten much deeper as I get older. Thanks for what you all did for me. I appreciate it very much, and will not forget! Lance Burrell From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 13 14:35:37 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 09:35:37 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] "Knock-Out-Dropper" Message-ID: --part1_f4.c8f045b.28805329_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Were any of you gentlemen on the "Knock-Out-Dropper" B-17F, which flew with the 359th Squadron out of Molesworth? It was the first B-17 in the 8th AF to complete 50 and later 75 missions There is a picture of the plane in "Aviation History" It would be interesting to find out. Terry Lucas --part1_f4.c8f045b.28805329_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit      Were any of you gentlemen on the "Knock-Out-Dropper" B-17F, which flew
with the 359th Squadron out of Molesworth? It was the first B-17 in the 8th
AF to complete 50 and later 75 missions There is a picture of the plane in
"Aviation History" It would be interesting to find out.

Terry Lucas --part1_f4.c8f045b.28805329_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 13 15:18:59 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 09:18:59 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] re: just how close Message-ID: Bill: I can tell you what Oskar Bosch told me about the tactics of his Sturmstaffel, IV.(Sturm)/JG 3. They would fly down the bomber stream from the opposite direction and look for a Group or Squadron that was more spread out than the others. They would look for Groups or Squadrons that were on the outside of a turn or course change. Sometimes German radar would vector them to the grid coordinates of the course change. Bombers making a course change and on the outside of the turn, coupled with sometimes heavy prop wash from Groups in front, would sometimes cause the Groups or Squadrons to become more dispursed than normal. This was the ideal scenario if they had plenty of fuel, and more often than not, they didn't. Once they had found their intended targets, they would come in from the rear, as I have described before, three, five and seven abreast, concentatrating first on the rear of the formation, and then working their way forward. Sometimes they would attack one Squadron, and then roll over and dive down on the low Squadron or Group using gravity and speed to their advantage. And they would expose the armor plate under their seats to the bombers as they did. Rarely did they attack one at a time because so much firepower from the bombers could be directed in their direction. (A group of 100 Fortresses could lob one ton of lead per minute from their .50s, if all fired in unison!! Footnote: From Roger Freeman's The Mighty Eighth.) Sometimes they would attack one at a time when they were working over a cripple. Keep in mind, guys, Oskar was flying later in the war, '44 and '45, and Sturmstaffel tactics differed from those used earlier in the war, and tactics differed from one unit to the next. In all of the pictures I have of Oskar, he is happy, smiling, appears well-fed, and is just generally all around happy. (Gary Moncur, I have several digital pics of Oskar if you would like me to send them to you to post for the ring.) When I look at pictures of the bomber crews, I see haggard expressions, very tired eyes, and in some cases fear. I asked Oscar about this and why he appeared the way he did. In his heavy Austrian accent, he said, "Ah, Kevin, but you forget - we were the hunters and they were the hunted." An interesting perspective I never really thought about. Kevin >From: "Bill Hoyt" >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> >Subject: [303rd-Talk] re: just how close >Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 01:14:26 -0600 > >Thanks Bob, How did they come thru your formation, in single file or pairs >or what? > > > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 13 17:25:46 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Tooley, Dave) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 11:25:46 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] re: just how close Message-ID: Kevin, I appreciate your information about Oskar and tactics used. You mentioned that Oskar flew in 44 and 45 and that tactics may have changed. My uncle flew in the early part of 43 and I am interested in the fighter tactics of that time period. I'd like to know what he faced. Do know where I might be able to read up on the tactics from that time period? Thanks! Dave From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 13 20:52:01 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 15:52:01 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Unsubscribe Gee-H Message-ID: <70.cf74375.2880ab61@aol.com> --part1_70.cf74375.2880ab61_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Gary--Please temporarily unsubscribe me for one week, starting Saturday, July 14. Thank you Mike Zarelli --part1_70.cf74375.2880ab61_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit            Gary--Please temporarily unsubscribe me for one week, starting
      Saturday, July 14.
                                                                        
Thank you
                                                                        Mike
Zarelli --part1_70.cf74375.2880ab61_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sat Jul 14 19:57:16 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 13:57:16 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] re: just how close Message-ID: Dave: Many of the books out there will describe tactics used earlier in the war. There is a great book on IV.(Sturm)/JG 3, written and published in German - probably won't help much. I'll have to dig mine out to give you the title. I am no expert in this field, but I will tell you what I have read and some opinions based on stories told to me by the vets. Earlier in the war, the Luftwaffe would attack head on because earlier versions of the B-17 had little armament in the nose - a couple of .30 or .50 machine guns. The thinking was close fast and get out of there. But they found these tactics didn't work well because the closure rate was so fast that pilots could only get off a few short bursts. Although many Fortresses fell to these tactics, other tactics proved more effective. I'll go through my library tonight and see if I can't recommend something more thorough and from a better source. Kevin >From: "Tooley, Dave" >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: "'303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com'" <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> >Subject: RE: [303rd-Talk] re: just how close >Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 11:25:46 -0500 > >Kevin, >I appreciate your information about Oskar and tactics used. You mentioned >that Oskar flew in 44 and 45 and that tactics may have changed. My uncle >flew in the early part of 43 and I am interested in the fighter tactics of >that time period. I'd like to know what he faced. Do know where I might >be >able to read up on the tactics from that time period? >Thanks! >Dave > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sat Jul 14 21:42:04 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (William Heller) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 13:42:04 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] re: just how close References: Message-ID: <3B50AE9C.E549F498@attglobal.net> Working as a Lufthasa airline captain for ten years, I worked with, became close friends with, and many times discussed "our" war with those against whom we all fought in the air. Attempting to specify when certain tactics were used throughout the war is like beating a dead horse. Like us, the Luftwaffe was experimenting daily. As for my own experience, I had nose attacks from the very first missions to the very last ones. This was a span of two years. Many Luftwaffe pilots, friends of mine, who flew against us, further explained the so-called "ramming" about which so many of you speak. In a sense, it was NOT ramming, per se. More often, it was designed to "coincide" with a Bomber. That is, they would come up from the rear or rear side and then put their plane in a position to "collide" with one or more of our bombers. They would plan their escape just prior to impact. One friend of mine told me how he survived four such "rammings" ALL from the FOUR o'clock position. They later avoided that type of tactic. There was no "ramming" of a head-on or Kamikaze nature exccept for some suicidal fanatics who may have done so. It was NOT a tactic to do it head-on. Nowthen, unless all my meetings, parties, and drinking, with my close Luftwaffe friends, all of whom flew against us .... were not the truth, we must accept what they told me. Galland and I became friends and often spoke of the war and he, too, mentioned that they designed "tactics" on a day to day basis .... just as did we. The luftwaffe was a great air force. It had a lot of experience, from the Spanish war to their early days when they had little opposition. Ah! But when they encountered us they had a new problem they never had before .... NUMBERS ... to a man my Luftwaffe friends told me they were constantly amazed that we fielded MORE AND MORE aircraft every day, while they were struggling to maintain fuel supplies for the many aircraft they had. It was a good thing we won! Cheers! Bill Heller Kevin Pearson wrote: > Dave: Many of the books out there will describe tactics used earlier in the > war. There is a great book on IV.(Sturm)/JG 3, written and published in > German - probably won't help much. I'll have to dig mine out to give you > the title. > > I am no expert in this field, but I will tell you what I have read and some > opinions based on stories told to me by the vets. Earlier in the war, the > Luftwaffe would attack head on because earlier versions of the B-17 had > little armament in the nose - a couple of .30 or .50 machine guns. The > thinking was close fast and get out of there. But they found these tactics > didn't work well because the closure rate was so fast that pilots could only > get off a few short bursts. Although many Fortresses fell to these tactics, > other tactics proved more effective. > > I'll go through my library tonight and see if I can't recommend something > more thorough and from a better source. > Kevin > > >From: "Tooley, Dave" > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > >To: "'303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com'" <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > >Subject: RE: [303rd-Talk] re: just how close > >Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 11:25:46 -0500 > > > >Kevin, > >I appreciate your information about Oskar and tactics used. You mentioned > >that Oskar flew in 44 and 45 and that tactics may have changed. My uncle > >flew in the early part of 43 and I am interested in the fighter tactics of > >that time period. I'd like to know what he faced. Do know where I might > >be > >able to read up on the tactics from that time period? > >Thanks! > >Dave > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sun Jul 15 03:17:15 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 22:17:15 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] re: just how close Message-ID: <104.6164303.2882572b@aol.com> --part1_104.6164303.2882572b_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit If you are asking about the FW190s that I mentioned, they were four abreast and all firing their 20mm cannons. Bob Finley. --part1_104.6164303.2882572b_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit If you are asking about the FW190s that I mentioned, they were four abreast
and all firing their 20mm cannons.                                            
   Bob Finley. --part1_104.6164303.2882572b_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sun Jul 15 03:24:02 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 22:24:02 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] "Knock-Out-Dropper" Message-ID: <18.f4bbad2.288258c2@aol.com> --part1_18.f4bbad2.288258c2_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I believe that our crew flew at least one mission in KO-Dropper. I also met the man who was ball-turret gunner on the first crew that probably named her. His name was John L Berringer and he finished 25 missions on June 25, 1943. I,m not sure how many were in KO-dropper. Bob Finley --part1_18.f4bbad2.288258c2_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I believe that our crew flew at least one mission in KO-Dropper. I also met
the man who was ball-turret gunner on the first crew that probably named her.
His name was John L Berringer and he finished 25 missions on June 25, 1943.
I,m not sure how many were in KO-dropper.                                     
   Bob Finley --part1_18.f4bbad2.288258c2_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sun Jul 15 19:29:23 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 14:29:23 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: 303rd-Talk digest, German Air Tactics Message-ID: I never saw the German aircraft coming in head on except over Berlin on March 6, 1944, when an ME-109 came at us but he never fired a shot. While in POW camp some of the later arrivals spoke of them lining up six or seven abreast and coming head-on and all firing. They said that they never failed to bring down several B-17s but they stopped that tactic all of a sudden. No one seemed to know why they stopped when it paid off so well. Any comment. Bill D. From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sun Jul 15 20:42:26 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (William Heller) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 12:42:26 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: 303rd-Talk digest, German Air Tactics References: Message-ID: <3B51F222.9AB3CD8A@attglobal.net> Bill Dallas ... First you were lucky NOT to have seen a head-on attack until lazte in your tour as you did. Secondly, most likely that German pilot who was NOT firing at you, was already dead. Bill Heller Wmjdallas@aol.com wrote: > I never saw the German aircraft coming in head on except over Berlin on March > 6, 1944, when an ME-109 came at us but he never fired a shot. While in POW > camp some of the later arrivals spoke of them lining up six or seven abreast > and coming head-on and all firing. They said that they never failed to bring > down several B-17s but they stopped that tactic all of a sudden. No one > seemed to know why they stopped when it paid off so well. Any comment. > Bill D. From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Jul 16 12:01:11 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Steve Hollifield) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 04:01:11 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [303rd-Talk] Hist. Chan. Suicide Missions(Flying the Ball) Message-ID: <20010716110111.27847.qmail@web4501.mail.yahoo.com> I know this group has fielded discussions before concerning the History Channel's Ball Turret documentary. I saw the show last night for the first time, and I have a question concerning Andy Rooney's comments comparing the B17 to the B24. Mr Rooney was saying (and I paraphrase)that despite the B24 being a techically superior aircraft that would beat the B17 in "almost every catagory of comparison" he would alway chose to take his chances in the B17. He said that something just made the B17 better the way an athlete may excel without you being able to "define" what made him different. I hope that some of you fellas can help "define" the advantages of the B17. Some questions to help spark the conversation would be: Why were the B17s bombing from 25-30,000 feet when the Liberators were bombing at much lower altitudes? Also, can any of you engineering types point to specific design differences that would account for the B17s ability to withstand more punishment and still fly? I suspect that the B24 was built to lift greater loads and maybe even stretch the envelope on range at the expense of making it a bit more fragile(ie larger fuel capacity, over wing design to increase lift, etc.). Anyway, I'm guessing here and would like some "first hand info". Thanks, Steve Hollifield Son of Robert G. Hollifield 303rd BG 358th Sqd. (April 44 -- July 44) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Jul 16 12:56:53 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 11:56:53 +0000 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Hist. Chan. Suicide Missions(Flying the Ball) Message-ID: <20010716115653.FHKJ5127.mtiwmhc25.worldnet.att.net@webmail.worldnet.att.net> Steve, for one thing the "davis" wing on the B-24 prevented the aircraft bombing from higher altitudes. It was narrow and rather fragile by B-17 standards. The B- 24 was faster and did carry a larger bomb load but the stability of the larger B-17 wing created a suitable platform for bombing from higher altitudes. Bill Runnels, B-17 bombardier > I know this group has fielded discussions before > concerning the History Channel's Ball Turret > documentary. I saw the show last night for the first > time, and I have a question concerning Andy Rooney's > comments comparing the B17 to the B24. Mr Rooney was > saying (and I paraphrase)that despite the B24 being a > techically superior aircraft that would beat the B17 > in "almost every catagory of comparison" he would > alway chose to take his chances in the B17. He said > that something just made the B17 better the way an > athlete may excel without you being able to "define" > what made him different. > > I hope that some of you fellas can help "define" the > advantages of the B17. Some questions to help spark > the conversation would be: Why were the B17s bombing > from 25-30,000 feet when the Liberators were bombing > at much lower altitudes? Also, can any of you > engineering types point to specific design differences > that would account for the B17s ability to withstand > more punishment and still fly? I suspect that the B24 > was built to lift greater loads and maybe even stretch > the envelope on range at the expense of making it a > bit more fragile(ie larger fuel capacity, over wing > design to increase lift, etc.). Anyway, I'm guessing > here and would like some "first hand info". > > Thanks, > Steve Hollifield > > Son of Robert G. Hollifield > 303rd BG 358th Sqd. (April 44 -- July 44) > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail > http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Jul 16 15:04:34 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 09:04:34 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Hist. Chan. Suicide Missions(Flying the Ball) Message-ID: That "Davis" wing created other problems as well. Having spoken to large number of B-24 pilots (and becoming friends with them, and having had drinks with them, etc.) they tell me that you had to get the B-24 "on the step," that is, you had to adjust the pitch of the aircraft so the ship was flying straight and level. If the plane was not on the step, the tail sort of hung down a bit and the controls would feel sloppy, airspeed was reduced, and fuel consumption increased. Getting on the step was more difficult with a full bomb and fuel load. One of the design differences was the B-24 used hydraulics more than the B-17. The B-17 control linkages were by cable as opposed to hydraulics in the 24. I've had people tell me that because of this, the B-24 tended to catch fire more easily, but this is not true. Hydraulic fuel will not catch fire until a very high flashpoint is reached. A 24 flight engineer explained this to me once in infinite detail..... Another major design difference was the power turret with twin .50s in the tail of the B-24. Rooney might like to take all his chances in a B-17, but tell that to the B-24 guys and I think they would differ with him. The 24 was a great airplane, every bit as great as the B-17 in terms of what it accomplished. Early in the war the B-17s got most of the attention because they were the only ones flying missions. And keep in mind most of the 1st Air Division bases, the ones to first become operational, are closest to London where the press corps was stationed. These two things taken together, the B-17 got more news ink than the B-24, even after the 2nd Air Division became operational. And because all of the media hype surrounded the B-17, people were skeptical the B-24 could live up to the reputation of the B-17. The 17 got more prewar publicity, too, and was firmly etched in the hearts and minds of military personnel and civilians before the war. I have seen pictures of 24s that have returned from missions with as much damage as the B-17s. And the 24 flyboys will argue to their dying days it was every bit as good, if not better than, the B-17. (But to me, no other airplane is more beautiful than a B-17 in flight. The 24 does not have the clean lines the 17 has.) I've also spoken with men who piloted both planes and almost without exception, these guys prefer the B-17. Although the statistics make the 24 sound like a superior a/c, the guys who flew both said the 17 was just easier to fly. It should be remembered that both airplanes played a pivotal role in defeating the Axis powers. Kevin >From: b.runnels@att.net >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Hist. Chan. Suicide Missions(Flying the Ball) >Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 11:56:53 +0000 > >Steve, for one thing the "davis" wing on the B-24 >prevented the aircraft bombing from higher altitudes. It >was narrow and rather fragile by B-17 standards. The B- >24 was faster and did carry a larger bomb load but the >stability of the larger B-17 wing created a suitable >platform for bombing from higher altitudes. >Bill Runnels, B-17 bombardier > > I know this group has fielded discussions before > > concerning the History Channel's Ball Turret > > documentary. I saw the show last night for the first > > time, and I have a question concerning Andy Rooney's > > comments comparing the B17 to the B24. Mr Rooney was > > saying (and I paraphrase)that despite the B24 being a > > techically superior aircraft that would beat the B17 > > in "almost every catagory of comparison" he would > > alway chose to take his chances in the B17. He said > > that something just made the B17 better the way an > > athlete may excel without you being able to "define" > > what made him different. > > > > I hope that some of you fellas can help "define" the > > advantages of the B17. Some questions to help spark > > the conversation would be: Why were the B17s bombing > > from 25-30,000 feet when the Liberators were bombing > > at much lower altitudes? Also, can any of you > > engineering types point to specific design differences > > that would account for the B17s ability to withstand > > more punishment and still fly? I suspect that the B24 > > was built to lift greater loads and maybe even stretch > > the envelope on range at the expense of making it a > > bit more fragile(ie larger fuel capacity, over wing > > design to increase lift, etc.). Anyway, I'm guessing > > here and would like some "first hand info". > > > > Thanks, > > Steve Hollifield > > > > Son of Robert G. Hollifield > > 303rd BG 358th Sqd. (April 44 -- July 44) > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail > > http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > > > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Jul 16 16:34:37 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 15:34:37 +0000 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Hist. Chan. Suicide Missions(Flying the Ball) Message-ID: <20010716153437.WFZ3707.mtiwmhc24.worldnet.att.net@webmail.worldnet.att.net> From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Jul 16 16:34:39 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 15:34:39 +0000 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Hist. Chan. Suicide Missions(Flying the Ball) Message-ID: <20010716153439.USOA3208.mtiwmhc21.worldnet.att.net@webmail.worldnet.att.net> From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Jul 16 16:34:41 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 15:34:41 +0000 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Hist. Chan. Suicide Missions(Flying the Ball) Message-ID: <20010716153441.HCPN1777.mtiwmhc23.worldnet.att.net@webmail.worldnet.att.net> From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Jul 16 16:39:52 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 15:39:52 +0000 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Hist. Chan. Suicide Missions(Flying the Ball) Message-ID: <20010716153952.YBA3707.mtiwmhc24.worldnet.att.net@webmail.worldnet.att.net> There was great rivalry between the B-17 and B-24 crews. We B-17 people referred (in jest) to the B-24 as the "flying coffen". HA.....Bill Runnels From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Jul 16 16:50:10 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 15:50:10 +0000 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Hist. Chan. Suicide Missions(Flying the Ball) Message-ID: <20010716155010.BBQS3707.mtiwmhc24.worldnet.att.net@webmail.worldnet.att.net> There was great rivalry between the B-17 and B-24 crews. We B-17 folk referred to the B-24 (in jest) as the "flying coffin". HA....Bill Runnels From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Jul 16 17:33:25 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (William Heller) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 09:33:25 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Hist. Chan. Suicide Missions(Flying the Ball) References: <20010716110111.27847.qmail@web4501.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3B531755.B28E2EA2@attglobal.net> Steve Hollifield ... Putting aside various people's penchant for liking or disliking something regardless of facts mentioned pro or con ... we must realize some reasons WHY the difference between the B24 and the B17. First of all altitude: The B17 wing had no camber. It was the same shape on top as on bottom. This fact should make a mockery of Bernouli's Theorm, however the wing was attached to the fuselage at an angle of incidence of 3%. This fact gave it the airflow necessary to make Bernouli's Theorm work, but also allowed the B17 to fly at higher altitudes. The B24 had a Davis Wing and could not fly at the altitudes at which the B17 flew. The B24 could carry heavier loads and also fly abit faster. Suffice it to say, at any B17 mission briefing, when we were told B24s would be in the bomber column, cheers went up from the group being briefed ... for they knew the Luftwaffe would attack the B24 first, due to flying below the B17s. Also, this fact is firmed by the Luftwaffe friends of mine during my Lufthansa tenure as a Captain. They also said they liked to attack the B24 at the wing root, for this was one of the weakest points in the airplane. I personally saw several B24s attacked in this manner, and, indeed, their wings immediately folded up. I will not dwell on the "political" side of this, but it WAS heard in certain circles, that with the B17 becoming so famous in Europe that Consolidated also wanted THEIR airplane in theatre. That could be an old wive's tale, BUT, it bears some thought. In conclusion, and as many of my Luftwaffe friends told me ... they were constantly beaten by sheer NUMBERS and if the B24 added to this factor, then it did its job. I recall mentioning to my Luftwaffe friends that it was never WHETHER we would win, but WHEN. They mentioned that they did not have the luxury to have these thoughts, for they were always fighting to retain ground they were losing. Many of our friends may have some other ideas on your query. The above is mine. Cheers! Bill Heller Steve Hollifield wrote: > I know this group has fielded discussions before > concerning the History Channel's Ball Turret > documentary. I saw the show last night for the first > time, and I have a question concerning Andy Rooney's > comments comparing the B17 to the B24. Mr Rooney was > saying (and I paraphrase)that despite the B24 being a > techically superior aircraft that would beat the B17 > in "almost every catagory of comparison" he would > alway chose to take his chances in the B17. He said > that something just made the B17 better the way an > athlete may excel without you being able to "define" > what made him different. > > I hope that some of you fellas can help "define" the > advantages of the B17. Some questions to help spark > the conversation would be: Why were the B17s bombing > from 25-30,000 feet when the Liberators were bombing > at much lower altitudes? Also, can any of you > engineering types point to specific design differences > that would account for the B17s ability to withstand > more punishment and still fly? I suspect that the B24 > was built to lift greater loads and maybe even stretch > the envelope on range at the expense of making it a > bit more fragile(ie larger fuel capacity, over wing > design to increase lift, etc.). Anyway, I'm guessing > here and would like some "first hand info". > > Thanks, > Steve Hollifield > > Son of Robert G. Hollifield > 303rd BG 358th Sqd. (April 44 -- July 44) > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail > http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ Steve Hollifield wrote: > I know this group has fielded discussions before > concerning the History Channel's Ball Turret > documentary. I saw the show last night for the first > time, and I have a question concerning Andy Rooney's > comments comparing the B17 to the B24. Mr Rooney was > saying (and I paraphrase)that despite the B24 being a > techically superior aircraft that would beat the B17 > in "almost every catagory of comparison" he would > alway chose to take his chances in the B17. He said > that something just made the B17 better the way an > athlete may excel without you being able to "define" > what made him different. > > I hope that some of you fellas can help "define" the > advantages of the B17. Some questions to help spark > the conversation would be: Why were the B17s bombing > from 25-30,000 feet when the Liberators were bombing > at much lower altitudes? Also, can any of you > engineering types point to specific design differences > that would account for the B17s ability to withstand > more punishment and still fly? I suspect that the B24 > was built to lift greater loads and maybe even stretch > the envelope on range at the expense of making it a > bit more fragile(ie larger fuel capacity, over wing > design to increase lift, etc.). Anyway, I'm guessing > here and would like some "first hand info". > > Thanks, > Steve Hollifield > > Son of Robert G. Hollifield > 303rd BG 358th Sqd. (April 44 -- July 44) > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail > http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Jul 16 17:47:12 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 12:47:12 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: B24 Message-ID: <95.d69da92.28847490@aol.com> --part1_95.d69da92.28847490_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I can remember a B24 trying to get off the ground as we in the B17's were passing near their base. This plane didn't make it and crashed at the end of the runway. To wit; maybe the Davis wing with less area for lifting capability. I didn't have a good feeling about what I saw. Bob --part1_95.d69da92.28847490_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I can remember a B24 trying to get off the ground as we in the B17's were
passing near their base.  This plane didn't make it and crashed at the end of
the runway.  To wit; maybe the Davis wing with less area for lifting
capability.  I didn't have a good feeling about what I saw. Bob --part1_95.d69da92.28847490_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Jul 16 18:19:39 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 13:19:39 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: 303rd-Talk digest, B-17 vs B-24 Message-ID: <7d.17dea869.28847c2b@aol.com> In my room in a German POW camp we had fighter pilots, B-17 pilots and B-24 pilots, plus bombardiers and navigators from both B-17s and B-24s. When we were bored and had our stomach full, we argued about which bomber was the best. Some wise-ass fighter pilot would usually say," what are you arguing about, you're both here." That didn't stop us. Bill D. From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Jul 16 19:06:12 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 13:06:12 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] To Bill Heller Message-ID: Bill: When did you fly for Lufthansa and did you ever fly the Lockheed Constellation? In looking over some of the airplane crashs web sites, the Constellation appears to have crashed more than about any other airliner. I have heard the Constellation, like the B-29, had problems with engine fires when going from low to high blower, but many of the accidents appear to be pilot error. Realizing that weather forecasting was not as it now is, coupled with the reliability of the jet engine and improvements in navigation, do you know of other reasons why the Conny crashed so much. By the way, we have a Conny at the Kansas City Downtown Airport that does the air show circuit. She is a beautiful machine, second only to the Fortress in my book. Kevin >From: William Heller >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Hist. Chan. Suicide Missions(Flying the Ball) >Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 09:33:25 -0700 > >Steve Hollifield ... > >Putting aside various people's penchant for liking or disliking >something regardless of facts mentioned pro or con ... we must realize >some reasons WHY the difference between the B24 and the B17. First of >all altitude: The B17 wing had no camber. It was the same shape on top >as on bottom. This fact should make a mockery of Bernouli's Theorm, >however the wing was attached to the fuselage at an angle of incidence >of 3%. This fact gave it the airflow necessary to make Bernouli's Theorm >work, but also allowed the B17 to fly at higher altitudes. The B24 had a >Davis Wing and could not fly at the altitudes at which the B17 flew. >The B24 could carry heavier loads and also fly abit faster. Suffice it >to say, at any B17 mission briefing, when we were told B24s would be in >the bomber column, cheers went up from the group being briefed ... for >they knew the Luftwaffe would attack the B24 first, due to flying below >the B17s. Also, this fact is firmed by the Luftwaffe friends of mine >during my Lufthansa tenure as a Captain. They also said they liked to >attack the B24 at the wing root, for this was one of the weakest points >in the airplane. I personally saw several B24s attacked in this manner, >and, indeed, their wings immediately folded up. > >I will not dwell on the "political" side of this, but it WAS heard in >certain circles, that with the B17 becoming so famous in Europe that >Consolidated also wanted THEIR airplane in theatre. That could be an old >wive's tale, BUT, it bears some thought. > >In conclusion, and as many of my Luftwaffe friends told me ... they were >constantly beaten by sheer NUMBERS and if the B24 added to this factor, >then it did its job. > >I recall mentioning to my Luftwaffe friends that it was never WHETHER we >would win, but WHEN. They mentioned that they did not have the luxury to >have these thoughts, for they were always fighting to retain ground they >were losing. > >Many of our friends may have some other ideas on your query. The above >is mine. > >Cheers! > >Bill Heller > >Steve Hollifield wrote: > > > I know this group has fielded discussions before > > concerning the History Channel's Ball Turret > > documentary. I saw the show last night for the first > > time, and I have a question concerning Andy Rooney's > > comments comparing the B17 to the B24. Mr Rooney was > > saying (and I paraphrase)that despite the B24 being a > > techically superior aircraft that would beat the B17 > > in "almost every catagory of comparison" he would > > alway chose to take his chances in the B17. He said > > that something just made the B17 better the way an > > athlete may excel without you being able to "define" > > what made him different. > > > > I hope that some of you fellas can help "define" the > > advantages of the B17. Some questions to help spark > > the conversation would be: Why were the B17s bombing > > from 25-30,000 feet when the Liberators were bombing > > at much lower altitudes? Also, can any of you > > engineering types point to specific design differences > > that would account for the B17s ability to withstand > > more punishment and still fly? I suspect that the B24 > > was built to lift greater loads and maybe even stretch > > the envelope on range at the expense of making it a > > bit more fragile(ie larger fuel capacity, over wing > > design to increase lift, etc.). Anyway, I'm guessing > > here and would like some "first hand info". > > > > Thanks, > > Steve Hollifield > > > > Son of Robert G. Hollifield > > 303rd BG 358th Sqd. (April 44 -- July 44) > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail > > http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > >Steve Hollifield wrote: > > > I know this group has fielded discussions before > > concerning the History Channel's Ball Turret > > documentary. I saw the show last night for the first > > time, and I have a question concerning Andy Rooney's > > comments comparing the B17 to the B24. Mr Rooney was > > saying (and I paraphrase)that despite the B24 being a > > techically superior aircraft that would beat the B17 > > in "almost every catagory of comparison" he would > > alway chose to take his chances in the B17. He said > > that something just made the B17 better the way an > > athlete may excel without you being able to "define" > > what made him different. > > > > I hope that some of you fellas can help "define" the > > advantages of the B17. Some questions to help spark > > the conversation would be: Why were the B17s bombing > > from 25-30,000 feet when the Liberators were bombing > > at much lower altitudes? Also, can any of you > > engineering types point to specific design differences > > that would account for the B17s ability to withstand > > more punishment and still fly? I suspect that the B24 > > was built to lift greater loads and maybe even stretch > > the envelope on range at the expense of making it a > > bit more fragile(ie larger fuel capacity, over wing > > design to increase lift, etc.). Anyway, I'm guessing > > here and would like some "first hand info". > > > > Thanks, > > Steve Hollifield > > > > Son of Robert G. Hollifield > > 303rd BG 358th Sqd. (April 44 -- July 44) > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail > > http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Jul 16 21:30:25 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (David Y) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 13:30:25 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] B-24 Message-ID: <003e01c10e36$3c5f83c0$188fe0d8@h4k3401> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_003B_01C10DFB.78F418E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable There's an often seen film of a B-24 getting hit by a flak shell where = the right wing folds up at the root accompanied by a huge gasolene flame = which reminds me of being told by a Liberator pilot, and Fortress = crewmen as well, that the inside of the B-24 ALWAYS smelled of av-gas = and the B-17 didn't. It seems to me that if you can smell gasolene fumes = then there must be a greater hazard than if you can't smell fumes. - - - Dave Young - - -=20 ------=_NextPart_000_003B_01C10DFB.78F418E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
There's an often seen film of a B-24 getting hit by a flak shell = where the=20 right wing folds up at the root accompanied by a huge gasolene = flame=20 which reminds me of being told by a Liberator pilot, and = Fortress crewmen=20 as well, that the inside of the B-24 ALWAYS smelled of av-gas and the = B-17=20 didn't. It seems to me that if you can smell gasolene fumes then there = must be a=20 greater hazard than if you can't smell fumes.
- - - Dave Young - - - 
------=_NextPart_000_003B_01C10DFB.78F418E0-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Jul 16 21:57:38 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 16:57:38 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Hist. Chan. Suicide Missions(Flying the Ball) Message-ID: Steve Hollifield The undersigned has flown both B17s and B24s and will try to answer your questions from experience not a book. Let me state I assume you are not an aeronautical engineer nor an experienced pilot so I will keep these answers as non technical as possible which means I may get a bit of flak from some who will want to educate me which is OK with me. I will keep this simple so no matter what you are your questions will be answered. A 24 has a double bomb bay. A17 has one.They can both lift about the same weight of bombs but the 24 has more room. Or you can put fuel tanks in one of them and make it longer range but a death trap if you used the Bombay tank in combat. Without the bomb bay tank there is little difference in their range. A 17 had single row 9 cylinder Wright engines. A 24 had two row 14 cylinder Pratt & Whitneys engines. The P &W was probably a bit smoother, But I think the Wrights are less troublesome and more reliable simply because they had less parts to malfunction. They were both about the same horsepower Now what I think is the big difference. The 24 had a high lift, High Aspect ratio (Long & Skinny) wing. It could fly with a high wing loading, But compared to a 17 had very poor slow flight characteristics and stalled quite abruptly. Also being longer made it more difficult to fly close formation. which was bad as close formation concentrated our firepower and gave us better bomb patterns on the ground. The above also gave 17s much better 2 and 3 engine ability. You could actually take a 17 off on 3 engines and maintain altitude on two (if you knew how) I won't get involved here but the shape of the 17 wing caused it to derive more of its lift percentage wise from the impact of the relative wind on the underside of the wing rather than the difference in pressure on the top of the wing and the bottom as on a 24. The 24 was a bit faster below about 12,000 feet, but above 12000 feet the 17 became faster and the higher one got the more this became noticeable. Mostly because of the wings the 17 could operated 7 to 10 thousand feet higher than a 24 The 24 has a tricycle gear and hence is much easier to land than a 17 but a 24 doesn't bounce on landing near as well. Little humor here. This made 17 pilots a bit better pilots. I hope I have answered all your questions. If I didn't try again. I know all the answers but some of them may be wrong. Best Wishes, Jack Rencher From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Jul 16 22:08:16 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 16:08:16 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] B-24 Message-ID: Well, Dave, I flew on a 50 year old B-17 in 1992. I was only on her for about four hours, but all I could smell the entire flight was gas fumes and exhaust fumes, both on the ground and in the air. Could have been the age of the a/c, but I was quite sure we would explode any second! I think the B-24 referenced in you post was with the 15th AF. I read something about this a while back, she was hit over the target (can't remember now the name of the town but it was in sourhtern Germany) took the hit, spun in, and no chutes were seen. Anyone else have any information on this famous loss. (I still can't imagine what went through the pilots brain when he saw that wing fold up!!! How tragic and terrifying!) ) Kevin >From: "David Y" >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> >Subject: [303rd-Talk] B-24 >Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 13:30:25 -0700 > >There's an often seen film of a B-24 getting hit by a flak shell where the >right wing folds up at the root accompanied by a huge gasolene flame which >reminds me of being told by a Liberator pilot, and Fortress crewmen as >well, that the inside of the B-24 ALWAYS smelled of av-gas and the B-17 >didn't. It seems to me that if you can smell gasolene fumes then there must >be a greater hazard than if you can't smell fumes. >- - - Dave Young - - - _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Jul 16 22:18:04 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 17:18:04 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] B-24 Message-ID: --part1_bb.11100f3f.2884b40c_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit My dad was a flight engineer on a B-24. He flew an extra mission on a different plane to get his missions in. The pilot ordered him to turn the wing tanks on first. He told the pilot if he did it would flood the plane. It did!! the crew got mad at my dad and he told him "talk to your pilot'!! He should have had my dad run the fuselage tank first if I am not mistaken. I think I got the tanks right. Please let me know. I do remember him telling me that the B-24 smelled like av gas fumes. Terry Lucas --part1_bb.11100f3f.2884b40c_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit My dad was a flight engineer on a B-24. He flew an extra mission on a
different plane to get his missions in. The pilot ordered him to turn the
wing tanks on first. He told the pilot if he did it would flood the plane. It
did!! the crew got mad at my dad and he told him "talk to your pilot'!! He
should have had my dad run the fuselage tank first if I am not mistaken. I
think I got the tanks right. Please let me know. I do remember him telling me
that the B-24 smelled like av gas fumes.
Terry Lucas --part1_bb.11100f3f.2884b40c_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Jul 16 22:20:22 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 17:20:22 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: B-24 Message-ID: --part1_df.1795863e.2884b496_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 07/16/2001 4:18:04 PM US Eastern Standard Time, Thor542086 writes: > Subj: B-24 > Date: 07/16/2001 4:18:04 PM US Eastern Standard Time > From: Thor542086 > To: 303rd-talk@303rdbga.com > CC: 303rd-talk@303rdbgas.com > > > > My dad was a flight engineer on a B-24. He flew an extra mission on a > different plane to get his missions in. The pilot ordered him to turn the > wing tanks on first. He told the pilot if he did it would flood the plane. > It did!! the crew got mad at my dad and he told him "talk to your pilot'!! > He should have had my dad run the fuselage tank first if I am not mistaken. > I think I got the tanks right. Please let me know. I do remember him > telling me that the B-24 smelled like av gas fumes. > --part1_df.1795863e.2884b496_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 07/16/2001 4:18:04 PM US Eastern Standard Time, Thor542086
writes:


Subj: B-24
Date: 07/16/2001 4:18:04 PM US Eastern Standard Time
From: Thor542086
To: 303rd-talk@303rdbga.com
CC: 303rd-talk@303rdbgas.com



My dad was a flight engineer on a B-24. He flew an extra mission on a
different plane to get his missions in. The pilot ordered him to turn the
wing tanks on first. He told the pilot if he did it would flood the plane.
It did!! the crew got mad at my dad and he told him "talk to your pilot'!!
He should have had my dad run the fuselage tank first if I am not mistaken.
I think I got the tanks right. Please let me know. I do remember him
telling me that the B-24 smelled like av gas fumes.
Terry Lucas


 --part1_df.1795863e.2884b496_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Jul 16 22:28:52 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Dick Smith) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 14:28:52 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] B-24 References: <003e01c10e36$3c5f83c0$188fe0d8@h4k3401> Message-ID: <003701c10e3e$4ffb1220$21f833cf@richards> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0034_01C10E03.A2FD8920 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The B24" The Box The B17 Came in" Had a Fuel manifold about 12 " in = diameter which was behind all four engines all the tanks emptied into = this manifold and it was not Self Sealing . That's why you see so many = pictures of B24s exploding in the center section. I'll join Bill Heller = on the Cheers when we heard that the 2nd division was going to the same = target , we knew we wouldn't see any German fighters .Also when I flew = my second tour in P51s with the 1st Scouting force we would laugh at the = 24's trying to fly above 20000 ft. Enough said "Spider" Smith ----- Original Message -----=20 From: David Y=20 To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com=20 Sent: Monday, July 16, 2001 1:30 PM Subject: [303rd-Talk] B-24 There's an often seen film of a B-24 getting hit by a flak shell where = the right wing folds up at the root accompanied by a huge gasolene flame = which reminds me of being told by a Liberator pilot, and Fortress = crewmen as well, that the inside of the B-24 ALWAYS smelled of av-gas = and the B-17 didn't. It seems to me that if you can smell gasolene fumes = then there must be a greater hazard than if you can't smell fumes. - - - Dave Young - - -=20 ------=_NextPart_000_0034_01C10E03.A2FD8920 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
The B24" The Box The B17 Came in" Had a Fuel manifold about 12 " in = diameter which was behind all four engines all the tanks emptied into = this=20 manifold and it was not Self Sealing . That's why you see so many = pictures of=20 B24s exploding in the center section. I'll join Bill Heller on the = Cheers when=20 we heard that the 2nd division was going to the same target , we knew we = wouldn't see any German fighters .Also when I flew my second tour in = P51s with=20 the 1st Scouting force we would laugh at the 24's trying to fly above = 20000=20 ft.
      Enough said
        "Spider" Smith
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 David Y
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2001 = 1:30 PM
Subject: [303rd-Talk] = B-24

There's an often seen film of a B-24 getting hit by a flak shell = where=20 the right wing folds up at the root accompanied by a huge = gasolene=20 flame which reminds me of being told by a Liberator pilot, and=20 Fortress crewmen as well, that the inside of the B-24 ALWAYS = smelled of=20 av-gas and the B-17 didn't. It seems to me that if you can smell = gasolene=20 fumes then there must be a greater hazard than if you can't smell = fumes.
- - - Dave Young - - - 
------=_NextPart_000_0034_01C10E03.A2FD8920-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Jul 16 23:53:27 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (William Heller) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 15:53:27 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Hist. Chan. Suicide Missions(Flying the Ball) References: Message-ID: <3B537066.60255690@attglobal.net> Kevin Pearson ... It wil not really matter, but the "step" as referred to in flying is a total myth. A given airplane will fly so fast witha given amount of power. What CAN be considered a "step" is if you re-locate loads in the fuselage so as to have the CG evenly straddled. Before automatic trim in airliner type aircraft, this was sometimes done by re-locating passengers, etc. and NOT having a bunch of Stews congregating in the back of the plane. Those of us in airline work had a constant problem with those few pilots who would take an airplane a wee bit above their cruise and then slowly dive it to the proper altitude to get it on the "step" ,,,, in their minds, that is. CG is what counted. I have 33,000 reasons for telling you this. Cheers! Bill Heller Kevin Pearson wrote: > That "Davis" wing created other problems as well. Having spoken to large > number of B-24 pilots (and becoming friends with them, and having had drinks > with them, etc.) they tell me that you had to get the B-24 "on the step," > that is, you had to adjust the pitch of the aircraft so the ship was flying > straight and level. If the plane was not on the step, the tail sort of hung > down a bit and the controls would feel sloppy, airspeed was reduced, and > fuel consumption increased. Getting on the step was more difficult with a > full bomb and fuel load. > > One of the design differences was the B-24 used hydraulics more than the > B-17. The B-17 control linkages were by cable as opposed to hydraulics in > the 24. I've had people tell me that because of this, the B-24 tended to > catch fire more easily, but this is not true. Hydraulic fuel will not catch > fire until a very high flashpoint is reached. A 24 flight engineer > explained this to me once in infinite detail..... > > Another major design difference was the power turret with twin .50s in the > tail of the B-24. > > Rooney might like to take all his chances in a B-17, but tell that to the > B-24 guys and I think they would differ with him. The 24 was a great > airplane, every bit as great as the B-17 in terms of what it accomplished. > Early in the war the B-17s got most of the attention because they were the > only ones flying missions. And keep in mind most of the 1st Air Division > bases, the ones to first become operational, are closest to London where > the press corps was stationed. These two things taken together, the B-17 > got more news ink than the B-24, even after the 2nd Air Division became > operational. And because all of the media hype surrounded the B-17, people > were skeptical the B-24 could live up to the reputation of the B-17. The 17 > got more prewar publicity, too, and was firmly etched in the hearts and > minds of military personnel and civilians before the war. > > I have seen pictures of 24s that have returned from missions with as much > damage as the B-17s. And the 24 flyboys will argue to their dying days it > was every bit as good, if not better than, the B-17. (But to me, no other > airplane is more beautiful than a B-17 in flight. The 24 does not have the > clean lines the 17 has.) > > I've also spoken with men who piloted both planes and almost without > exception, these guys prefer the B-17. Although the statistics make the 24 > sound like a superior a/c, the guys who flew both said the 17 was just > easier to fly. > > It should be remembered that both airplanes played a pivotal role in > defeating the Axis powers. > Kevin > > >From: b.runnels@att.net > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Hist. Chan. Suicide Missions(Flying the Ball) > >Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 11:56:53 +0000 > > > >Steve, for one thing the "davis" wing on the B-24 > >prevented the aircraft bombing from higher altitudes. It > >was narrow and rather fragile by B-17 standards. The B- > >24 was faster and did carry a larger bomb load but the > >stability of the larger B-17 wing created a suitable > >platform for bombing from higher altitudes. > >Bill Runnels, B-17 bombardier > > > I know this group has fielded discussions before > > > concerning the History Channel's Ball Turret > > > documentary. I saw the show last night for the first > > > time, and I have a question concerning Andy Rooney's > > > comments comparing the B17 to the B24. Mr Rooney was > > > saying (and I paraphrase)that despite the B24 being a > > > techically superior aircraft that would beat the B17 > > > in "almost every catagory of comparison" he would > > > alway chose to take his chances in the B17. He said > > > that something just made the B17 better the way an > > > athlete may excel without you being able to "define" > > > what made him different. > > > > > > I hope that some of you fellas can help "define" the > > > advantages of the B17. Some questions to help spark > > > the conversation would be: Why were the B17s bombing > > > from 25-30,000 feet when the Liberators were bombing > > > at much lower altitudes? Also, can any of you > > > engineering types point to specific design differences > > > that would account for the B17s ability to withstand > > > more punishment and still fly? I suspect that the B24 > > > was built to lift greater loads and maybe even stretch > > > the envelope on range at the expense of making it a > > > bit more fragile(ie larger fuel capacity, over wing > > > design to increase lift, etc.). Anyway, I'm guessing > > > here and would like some "first hand info". > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Steve Hollifield > > > > > > Son of Robert G. Hollifield > > > 303rd BG 358th Sqd. (April 44 -- July 44) > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > > Do You Yahoo!? > > > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail > > > http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 17 00:30:13 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 19:30:13 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Hist. Chan. Suicide Missions(Flying the Ball) Message-ID: Kevin. Even if I disagreed with Bill Heller I would not say so. I respect him too much. He is one of the few greatest. Ask him what you do when you get behind the power curve and what you can do about it. Maybe you can't do that in jets. I never flew them. So I don't know. Best wishes, Jack From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 17 07:06:52 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (William Heller) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 23:06:52 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Hist. Chan. Suicide Missions(Flying the Ball) References: Message-ID: <3B53D5FC.C06E72E6@attglobal.net> JR ... Just shift the load, BUT, if the nose is heavy IT will also slow the aircraft just as tail heavy situation will. This is the same in props as well as jets ... and yes, even in gliders. I can recall some airline pilots as many as six times in a two hour flight, climb their plane about 200 feet and then bring it down to their cruising altitude with the mistaken belief they were now on the "step" ..... if so, WHY the many times dooing it in a two hour flight. Besides, Jack, put it in the bank, "step" is a myth. We had a toughbt ime with these non "theory of flight" types. Cheers old buddy, I wish we had more time tho chat at the last reunion. Maybe one time soon. Cheers! WCH Jprencher@aol.com wrote: > Kevin. Even if I disagreed with Bill Heller I would not say so. I respect him > too much. > He is one of the few greatest. Ask him what you do when you get behind the > power curve and what you can do about it. Maybe you can't do that in jets. I > never flew them. So I don't know. > Best wishes, > Jack From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 17 07:08:55 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (William Heller) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 23:08:55 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Hist. Chan. Suicide Missions(Flying the Ball) References: Message-ID: <3B53D677.474AFFB8@attglobal.net> JR ... Also, unless you are flying at about 115% lift over drag ... which relates to that tail or nose heavy situation or ANY wrong concern for CG, it will takes its toll. 115% L over D is about the best ratio. Cheers! WCH Jprencher@aol.com wrote: > Kevin. Even if I disagreed with Bill Heller I would not say so. I respect him > too much. > He is one of the few greatest. Ask him what you do when you get behind the > power curve and what you can do about it. Maybe you can't do that in jets. I > never flew them. So I don't know. > Best wishes, > Jack From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 17 07:23:35 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (William Heller) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 23:23:35 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] To Bill Heller References: Message-ID: <3B53D9E6.E53B6752@attglobal.net> Kevin Pearson ... I flew for Lufthasa as Captain and Member of the Luftfahrtbundesamt from 1956 to 1965. I flew the Connie and was finally checked out on the 707 but left Lufthansa for my next assignment which was in DC8s and DC10s and finaly 747. Worlwide as both Captain, And Check Captain/Supervisory Captain. Am not aware of any Connie crashes any more than other types at various times. For example the first DC6s had a rash of cashes before they learned the vent line fuel was flowing into the cabin air heater intake! And the 707 before the ventral fin and the extenion to vertical stablizer hieght, had a lot of losses. They had trouble with Vmc due to this lack of longitudical control. TWA alone lost several at their traingin base in Atlantic City in the early 60s. Pilot error will always be around, but in many cases is exacerbated with problems which were inherent but not found in time by the engineers in the factories. The DC10-10 model is a case in point. While louvres were placed in the cockpit door which had to be opened in flight, NO louvres were placed in the floor. So that, for example, when the Turkish Airlines crashed outside Paris due to a cargo door blowing open, it was actually the FLOOR which collapsed, due to pressure differential between upper cabin and cargo area ... onto the hydraulic control lines which caused the crash. The DC10-30 having a cargo floor (being a convertible model) would not have had this problem. But, in the end, cargo doors were supposed to be closed PROPERLY and if they were they would NOT blow off! More error. So you see, the factory engineers were concerned about possible explosive decompression in the cabin OR cockpit and thus LOUVRED the door so pressure would be equalized instead of the door becoming a missile in one direction or the other. Cheers! Bill Heller Kevin Pearson wrote: > Bill: When did you fly for Lufthansa and did you ever fly the Lockheed > Constellation? In looking over some of the airplane crashs web sites, the > Constellation appears to have crashed more than about any other airliner. I > have heard the Constellation, like the B-29, had problems with engine fires > when going from low to high blower, but many of the accidents appear to be > pilot error. Realizing that weather forecasting was not as it now is, > coupled with the reliability of the jet engine and improvements in > navigation, do you know of other reasons why the Conny crashed so much. By > the way, we have a Conny at the Kansas City Downtown Airport that does the > air show circuit. She is a beautiful machine, second only to the Fortress > in my book. > Kevin > > >From: William Heller > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Hist. Chan. Suicide Missions(Flying the Ball) > >Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 09:33:25 -0700 > > > >Steve Hollifield ... > > > >Putting aside various people's penchant for liking or disliking > >something regardless of facts mentioned pro or con ... we must realize > >some reasons WHY the difference between the B24 and the B17. First of > >all altitude: The B17 wing had no camber. It was the same shape on top > >as on bottom. This fact should make a mockery of Bernouli's Theorm, > >however the wing was attached to the fuselage at an angle of incidence > >of 3%. This fact gave it the airflow necessary to make Bernouli's Theorm > >work, but also allowed the B17 to fly at higher altitudes. The B24 had a > >Davis Wing and could not fly at the altitudes at which the B17 flew. > >The B24 could carry heavier loads and also fly abit faster. Suffice it > >to say, at any B17 mission briefing, when we were told B24s would be in > >the bomber column, cheers went up from the group being briefed ... for > >they knew the Luftwaffe would attack the B24 first, due to flying below > >the B17s. Also, this fact is firmed by the Luftwaffe friends of mine > >during my Lufthansa tenure as a Captain. They also said they liked to > >attack the B24 at the wing root, for this was one of the weakest points > >in the airplane. I personally saw several B24s attacked in this manner, > >and, indeed, their wings immediately folded up. > > > >I will not dwell on the "political" side of this, but it WAS heard in > >certain circles, that with the B17 becoming so famous in Europe that > >Consolidated also wanted THEIR airplane in theatre. That could be an old > >wive's tale, BUT, it bears some thought. > > > >In conclusion, and as many of my Luftwaffe friends told me ... they were > >constantly beaten by sheer NUMBERS and if the B24 added to this factor, > >then it did its job. > > > >I recall mentioning to my Luftwaffe friends that it was never WHETHER we > >would win, but WHEN. They mentioned that they did not have the luxury to > >have these thoughts, for they were always fighting to retain ground they > >were losing. > > > >Many of our friends may have some other ideas on your query. The above > >is mine. > > > >Cheers! > > > >Bill Heller > > > >Steve Hollifield wrote: > > > > > I know this group has fielded discussions before > > > concerning the History Channel's Ball Turret > > > documentary. I saw the show last night for the first > > > time, and I have a question concerning Andy Rooney's > > > comments comparing the B17 to the B24. Mr Rooney was > > > saying (and I paraphrase)that despite the B24 being a > > > techically superior aircraft that would beat the B17 > > > in "almost every catagory of comparison" he would > > > alway chose to take his chances in the B17. He said > > > that something just made the B17 better the way an > > > athlete may excel without you being able to "define" > > > what made him different. > > > > > > I hope that some of you fellas can help "define" the > > > advantages of the B17. Some questions to help spark > > > the conversation would be: Why were the B17s bombing > > > from 25-30,000 feet when the Liberators were bombing > > > at much lower altitudes? Also, can any of you > > > engineering types point to specific design differences > > > that would account for the B17s ability to withstand > > > more punishment and still fly? I suspect that the B24 > > > was built to lift greater loads and maybe even stretch > > > the envelope on range at the expense of making it a > > > bit more fragile(ie larger fuel capacity, over wing > > > design to increase lift, etc.). Anyway, I'm guessing > > > here and would like some "first hand info". > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Steve Hollifield > > > > > > Son of Robert G. Hollifield > > > 303rd BG 358th Sqd. (April 44 -- July 44) > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > > Do You Yahoo!? > > > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail > > > http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > > > >Steve Hollifield wrote: > > > > > I know this group has fielded discussions before > > > concerning the History Channel's Ball Turret > > > documentary. I saw the show last night for the first > > > time, and I have a question concerning Andy Rooney's > > > comments comparing the B17 to the B24. Mr Rooney was > > > saying (and I paraphrase)that despite the B24 being a > > > techically superior aircraft that would beat the B17 > > > in "almost every catagory of comparison" he would > > > alway chose to take his chances in the B17. He said > > > that something just made the B17 better the way an > > > athlete may excel without you being able to "define" > > > what made him different. > > > > > > I hope that some of you fellas can help "define" the > > > advantages of the B17. Some questions to help spark > > > the conversation would be: Why were the B17s bombing > > > from 25-30,000 feet when the Liberators were bombing > > > at much lower altitudes? Also, can any of you > > > engineering types point to specific design differences > > > that would account for the B17s ability to withstand > > > more punishment and still fly? I suspect that the B24 > > > was built to lift greater loads and maybe even stretch > > > the envelope on range at the expense of making it a > > > bit more fragile(ie larger fuel capacity, over wing > > > design to increase lift, etc.). Anyway, I'm guessing > > > here and would like some "first hand info". > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Steve Hollifield > > > > > > Son of Robert G. Hollifield > > > 303rd BG 358th Sqd. (April 44 -- July 44) > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > > Do You Yahoo!? > > > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail > > > http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 17 14:29:38 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 08:29:38 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] To Bill Heller Message-ID: Bill: Thanks for the infomation! Very interesting about the DC10s. I remember those crashes, but I was still a pretty young pup back then. And a 747 Captain, you have my ultimate respect! I can not imagine getting paid to go fly everyday! I learned to fly before I learned to drive, have always loved it, but I got glasses my sophomore year in high school, the same year the Vietnam War ended, and the military would not take me into their training program. Every day when I look up in the sky and see a contrail, I think about two things - how I should have payed for my flight training myself, and what 2,500 contrails must have looked like from the German side of the war. I read somerwhere that the first time the 8th went to Berlin, the bomber stream was 90 miles long, a mile wide and a quarter mile high. You are quite correct when you say we decimated Germany by shear numbers. The home front did their job well. Somewhere along the lines we lost that sense of national purpose. Did you ever meet with any hostility by the Germans following the war when the learned you bombed their cities? I'm sure your Luftwaffe associates understood, but how about everyone else? Facinating topic. Thanks again for the reply! Kevin >From: William Heller >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] To Bill Heller >Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 23:23:35 -0700 > >Kevin Pearson ... > >I flew for Lufthasa as Captain and Member of the Luftfahrtbundesamt from >1956 >to 1965. I flew the Connie and was finally checked out on the 707 but left >Lufthansa for my next assignment which was in DC8s and DC10s and finaly >747. >Worlwide as both Captain, And Check Captain/Supervisory Captain. > >Am not aware of any Connie crashes any more than other types at various >times. >For example the first DC6s had a rash of cashes before they learned the >vent >line fuel was flowing into the cabin air heater intake! And the 707 before >the >ventral fin and the extenion to vertical stablizer hieght, had a lot of >losses. They had trouble with Vmc due to this lack of longitudical >control. >TWA alone lost several at their traingin base in Atlantic City in the early >60s. > >Pilot error will always be around, but in many cases is exacerbated with >problems which were inherent but not found in time by the engineers in the >factories. The DC10-10 model is a case in point. While louvres were placed >in >the cockpit door which had to be opened in flight, NO louvres were placed >in >the floor. So that, for example, when the Turkish Airlines crashed outside >Paris due to a cargo door blowing open, it was actually the FLOOR which >collapsed, due to pressure differential between upper cabin and cargo area >... >onto the hydraulic control lines which caused the crash. The DC10-30 having >a >cargo floor (being a convertible model) would not have had this problem. >But, >in the end, cargo doors were supposed to be closed PROPERLY and if they >were >they would NOT blow off! More error. So you see, the factory engineers were >concerned about possible explosive decompression in the cabin OR cockpit >and >thus LOUVRED the door so pressure would be equalized instead of the door >becoming a missile in one direction or the other. > >Cheers! > >Bill Heller > >Kevin Pearson wrote: > > > Bill: When did you fly for Lufthansa and did you ever fly the Lockheed > > Constellation? In looking over some of the airplane crashs web sites, >the > > Constellation appears to have crashed more than about any other >airliner. I > > have heard the Constellation, like the B-29, had problems with engine >fires > > when going from low to high blower, but many of the accidents appear to >be > > pilot error. Realizing that weather forecasting was not as it now is, > > coupled with the reliability of the jet engine and improvements in > > navigation, do you know of other reasons why the Conny crashed so much. >By > > the way, we have a Conny at the Kansas City Downtown Airport that does >the > > air show circuit. She is a beautiful machine, second only to the >Fortress > > in my book. > > Kevin > > > > >From: William Heller > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Hist. Chan. Suicide Missions(Flying the Ball) > > >Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 09:33:25 -0700 > > > > > >Steve Hollifield ... > > > > > >Putting aside various people's penchant for liking or disliking > > >something regardless of facts mentioned pro or con ... we must realize > > >some reasons WHY the difference between the B24 and the B17. First of > > >all altitude: The B17 wing had no camber. It was the same shape on top > > >as on bottom. This fact should make a mockery of Bernouli's Theorm, > > >however the wing was attached to the fuselage at an angle of incidence > > >of 3%. This fact gave it the airflow necessary to make Bernouli's >Theorm > > >work, but also allowed the B17 to fly at higher altitudes. The B24 had >a > > >Davis Wing and could not fly at the altitudes at which the B17 flew. > > >The B24 could carry heavier loads and also fly abit faster. Suffice it > > >to say, at any B17 mission briefing, when we were told B24s would be in > > >the bomber column, cheers went up from the group being briefed ... for > > >they knew the Luftwaffe would attack the B24 first, due to flying below > > >the B17s. Also, this fact is firmed by the Luftwaffe friends of mine > > >during my Lufthansa tenure as a Captain. They also said they liked to > > >attack the B24 at the wing root, for this was one of the weakest points > > >in the airplane. I personally saw several B24s attacked in this manner, > > >and, indeed, their wings immediately folded up. > > > > > >I will not dwell on the "political" side of this, but it WAS heard in > > >certain circles, that with the B17 becoming so famous in Europe that > > >Consolidated also wanted THEIR airplane in theatre. That could be an >old > > >wive's tale, BUT, it bears some thought. > > > > > >In conclusion, and as many of my Luftwaffe friends told me ... they >were > > >constantly beaten by sheer NUMBERS and if the B24 added to this factor, > > >then it did its job. > > > > > >I recall mentioning to my Luftwaffe friends that it was never WHETHER >we > > >would win, but WHEN. They mentioned that they did not have the luxury >to > > >have these thoughts, for they were always fighting to retain ground >they > > >were losing. > > > > > >Many of our friends may have some other ideas on your query. The above > > >is mine. > > > > > >Cheers! > > > > > >Bill Heller > > > > > >Steve Hollifield wrote: > > > > > > > I know this group has fielded discussions before > > > > concerning the History Channel's Ball Turret > > > > documentary. I saw the show last night for the first > > > > time, and I have a question concerning Andy Rooney's > > > > comments comparing the B17 to the B24. Mr Rooney was > > > > saying (and I paraphrase)that despite the B24 being a > > > > techically superior aircraft that would beat the B17 > > > > in "almost every catagory of comparison" he would > > > > alway chose to take his chances in the B17. He said > > > > that something just made the B17 better the way an > > > > athlete may excel without you being able to "define" > > > > what made him different. > > > > > > > > I hope that some of you fellas can help "define" the > > > > advantages of the B17. Some questions to help spark > > > > the conversation would be: Why were the B17s bombing > > > > from 25-30,000 feet when the Liberators were bombing > > > > at much lower altitudes? Also, can any of you > > > > engineering types point to specific design differences > > > > that would account for the B17s ability to withstand > > > > more punishment and still fly? I suspect that the B24 > > > > was built to lift greater loads and maybe even stretch > > > > the envelope on range at the expense of making it a > > > > bit more fragile(ie larger fuel capacity, over wing > > > > design to increase lift, etc.). Anyway, I'm guessing > > > > here and would like some "first hand info". > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Steve Hollifield > > > > > > > > Son of Robert G. Hollifield > > > > 303rd BG 358th Sqd. (April 44 -- July 44) > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > > > Do You Yahoo!? > > > > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail > > > > http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > > > > > >Steve Hollifield wrote: > > > > > > > I know this group has fielded discussions before > > > > concerning the History Channel's Ball Turret > > > > documentary. I saw the show last night for the first > > > > time, and I have a question concerning Andy Rooney's > > > > comments comparing the B17 to the B24. Mr Rooney was > > > > saying (and I paraphrase)that despite the B24 being a > > > > techically superior aircraft that would beat the B17 > > > > in "almost every catagory of comparison" he would > > > > alway chose to take his chances in the B17. He said > > > > that something just made the B17 better the way an > > > > athlete may excel without you being able to "define" > > > > what made him different. > > > > > > > > I hope that some of you fellas can help "define" the > > > > advantages of the B17. Some questions to help spark > > > > the conversation would be: Why were the B17s bombing > > > > from 25-30,000 feet when the Liberators were bombing > > > > at much lower altitudes? Also, can any of you > > > > engineering types point to specific design differences > > > > that would account for the B17s ability to withstand > > > > more punishment and still fly? I suspect that the B24 > > > > was built to lift greater loads and maybe even stretch > > > > the envelope on range at the expense of making it a > > > > bit more fragile(ie larger fuel capacity, over wing > > > > design to increase lift, etc.). Anyway, I'm guessing > > > > here and would like some "first hand info". > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Steve Hollifield > > > > > > > > Son of Robert G. Hollifield > > > > 303rd BG 358th Sqd. (April 44 -- July 44) > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > > > Do You Yahoo!? > > > > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail > > > > http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 17 14:38:36 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 09:38:36 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Hist. Chan. Suicide Missions(Flying the Ball) Message-ID: Bill, Dear Friend, I agree with you completely on your weight information. Thank you. I also think you know more about airplanes and the theory of flight than anyone I have ever met and I really mean that. I think you are what makes this forum so interesting. Your knowledge of aircraft is a rare jewel that I hope all of us appreciate. We are all blessed to have access to your knowledge and experience. I look forward to talking with you again in Washington. That is were we get all kinds of things straightened out. Off I go to work IF I can get my old Subaru on the step between here and the shop? Very Best Wishes, Jack Rencher From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 17 17:02:13 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (William Heller) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 09:02:13 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] To Bill Heller References: Message-ID: <3B546185.DCD40768@attglobal.net> Kevin Pearson ... I did not notice any different feelings toward me when Germans learned that I was one of those bombers .... But, I was usually with my Lufthanas friends, and this may have tempered any feelings a bit. On the other hand, I was German and my use of the language perhaps also tempered it a bit. In the end, however, I am certain the Germans knew very well that defeat was someting with which they had to live. To this day, the war notwithstanding, I believe the Germans are a good ally of ours. Recall, how the Brits were the same and we sort of kicked their butt, too, way back in the revolutionary days and the ensuing 1812 gambit. To answer your query, no, I never did notice any rancor or bad feeling ... though who knows what may have been beneath the surface when some people met me and knew from whence I came. And, if you did not know it, I had two cousins flying against me in the Luftwaffe. One of whom flew with me in my littel plane in the States prior to his going back to Germany before the war. Both were KIA. One in me109s and the other in FW190s. But, we won. And for that all Americans should be very happy, for the other result would have been disastrous. Cheers! Bill Heller Kevin Pearson wrote: > Bill: Thanks for the infomation! Very interesting about the DC10s. I > remember those crashes, but I was still a pretty young pup back then. > > And a 747 Captain, you have my ultimate respect! I can not imagine getting > paid to go fly everyday! I learned to fly before I learned to drive, have > always loved it, but I got glasses my sophomore year in high school, the > same year the Vietnam War ended, and the military would not take me into > their training program. Every day when I look up in the sky and see a > contrail, I think about two things - how I should have payed for my flight > training myself, and what 2,500 contrails must have looked like from the > German side of the war. I read somerwhere that the first time the 8th went > to Berlin, the bomber stream was 90 miles long, a mile wide and a quarter > mile high. You are quite correct when you say we decimated Germany by shear > numbers. The home front did their job well. Somewhere along the lines we > lost that sense of national purpose. > > Did you ever meet with any hostility by the Germans following the war when > the learned you bombed their cities? I'm sure your Luftwaffe associates > understood, but how about everyone else? Facinating topic. > > Thanks again for the reply! > Kevin > > >From: William Heller > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] To Bill Heller > >Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 23:23:35 -0700 > > > >Kevin Pearson ... > > > >I flew for Lufthasa as Captain and Member of the Luftfahrtbundesamt from > >1956 > >to 1965. I flew the Connie and was finally checked out on the 707 but left > >Lufthansa for my next assignment which was in DC8s and DC10s and finaly > >747. > >Worlwide as both Captain, And Check Captain/Supervisory Captain. > > > >Am not aware of any Connie crashes any more than other types at various > >times. > >For example the first DC6s had a rash of cashes before they learned the > >vent > >line fuel was flowing into the cabin air heater intake! And the 707 before > >the > >ventral fin and the extenion to vertical stablizer hieght, had a lot of > >losses. They had trouble with Vmc due to this lack of longitudical > >control. > >TWA alone lost several at their traingin base in Atlantic City in the early > >60s. > > > >Pilot error will always be around, but in many cases is exacerbated with > >problems which were inherent but not found in time by the engineers in the > >factories. The DC10-10 model is a case in point. While louvres were placed > >in > >the cockpit door which had to be opened in flight, NO louvres were placed > >in > >the floor. So that, for example, when the Turkish Airlines crashed outside > >Paris due to a cargo door blowing open, it was actually the FLOOR which > >collapsed, due to pressure differential between upper cabin and cargo area > >... > >onto the hydraulic control lines which caused the crash. The DC10-30 having > >a > >cargo floor (being a convertible model) would not have had this problem. > >But, > >in the end, cargo doors were supposed to be closed PROPERLY and if they > >were > >they would NOT blow off! More error. So you see, the factory engineers were > >concerned about possible explosive decompression in the cabin OR cockpit > >and > >thus LOUVRED the door so pressure would be equalized instead of the door > >becoming a missile in one direction or the other. > > > >Cheers! > > > >Bill Heller > > > >Kevin Pearson wrote: > > > > > Bill: When did you fly for Lufthansa and did you ever fly the Lockheed > > > Constellation? In looking over some of the airplane crashs web sites, > >the > > > Constellation appears to have crashed more than about any other > >airliner. I > > > have heard the Constellation, like the B-29, had problems with engine > >fires > > > when going from low to high blower, but many of the accidents appear to > >be > > > pilot error. Realizing that weather forecasting was not as it now is, > > > coupled with the reliability of the jet engine and improvements in > > > navigation, do you know of other reasons why the Conny crashed so much. > >By > > > the way, we have a Conny at the Kansas City Downtown Airport that does > >the > > > air show circuit. She is a beautiful machine, second only to the > >Fortress > > > in my book. > > > Kevin > > > > > > >From: William Heller > > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Hist. Chan. Suicide Missions(Flying the Ball) > > > >Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 09:33:25 -0700 > > > > > > > >Steve Hollifield ... > > > > > > > >Putting aside various people's penchant for liking or disliking > > > >something regardless of facts mentioned pro or con ... we must realize > > > >some reasons WHY the difference between the B24 and the B17. First of > > > >all altitude: The B17 wing had no camber. It was the same shape on top > > > >as on bottom. This fact should make a mockery of Bernouli's Theorm, > > > >however the wing was attached to the fuselage at an angle of incidence > > > >of 3%. This fact gave it the airflow necessary to make Bernouli's > >Theorm > > > >work, but also allowed the B17 to fly at higher altitudes. The B24 had > >a > > > >Davis Wing and could not fly at the altitudes at which the B17 flew. > > > >The B24 could carry heavier loads and also fly abit faster. Suffice it > > > >to say, at any B17 mission briefing, when we were told B24s would be in > > > >the bomber column, cheers went up from the group being briefed ... for > > > >they knew the Luftwaffe would attack the B24 first, due to flying below > > > >the B17s. Also, this fact is firmed by the Luftwaffe friends of mine > > > >during my Lufthansa tenure as a Captain. They also said they liked to > > > >attack the B24 at the wing root, for this was one of the weakest points > > > >in the airplane. I personally saw several B24s attacked in this manner, > > > >and, indeed, their wings immediately folded up. > > > > > > > >I will not dwell on the "political" side of this, but it WAS heard in > > > >certain circles, that with the B17 becoming so famous in Europe that > > > >Consolidated also wanted THEIR airplane in theatre. That could be an > >old > > > >wive's tale, BUT, it bears some thought. > > > > > > > >In conclusion, and as many of my Luftwaffe friends told me ... they > >were > > > >constantly beaten by sheer NUMBERS and if the B24 added to this factor, > > > >then it did its job. > > > > > > > >I recall mentioning to my Luftwaffe friends that it was never WHETHER > >we > > > >would win, but WHEN. They mentioned that they did not have the luxury > >to > > > >have these thoughts, for they were always fighting to retain ground > >they > > > >were losing. > > > > > > > >Many of our friends may have some other ideas on your query. The above > > > >is mine. > > > > > > > >Cheers! > > > > > > > >Bill Heller > > > > > > > >Steve Hollifield wrote: > > > > > > > > > I know this group has fielded discussions before > > > > > concerning the History Channel's Ball Turret > > > > > documentary. I saw the show last night for the first > > > > > time, and I have a question concerning Andy Rooney's > > > > > comments comparing the B17 to the B24. Mr Rooney was > > > > > saying (and I paraphrase)that despite the B24 being a > > > > > techically superior aircraft that would beat the B17 > > > > > in "almost every catagory of comparison" he would > > > > > alway chose to take his chances in the B17. He said > > > > > that something just made the B17 better the way an > > > > > athlete may excel without you being able to "define" > > > > > what made him different. > > > > > > > > > > I hope that some of you fellas can help "define" the > > > > > advantages of the B17. Some questions to help spark > > > > > the conversation would be: Why were the B17s bombing > > > > > from 25-30,000 feet when the Liberators were bombing > > > > > at much lower altitudes? Also, can any of you > > > > > engineering types point to specific design differences > > > > > that would account for the B17s ability to withstand > > > > > more punishment and still fly? I suspect that the B24 > > > > > was built to lift greater loads and maybe even stretch > > > > > the envelope on range at the expense of making it a > > > > > bit more fragile(ie larger fuel capacity, over wing > > > > > design to increase lift, etc.). Anyway, I'm guessing > > > > > here and would like some "first hand info". > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Steve Hollifield > > > > > > > > > > Son of Robert G. Hollifield > > > > > 303rd BG 358th Sqd. (April 44 -- July 44) > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > > > > Do You Yahoo!? > > > > > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail > > > > > http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > > > > > > > >Steve Hollifield wrote: > > > > > > > > > I know this group has fielded discussions before > > > > > concerning the History Channel's Ball Turret > > > > > documentary. I saw the show last night for the first > > > > > time, and I have a question concerning Andy Rooney's > > > > > comments comparing the B17 to the B24. Mr Rooney was > > > > > saying (and I paraphrase)that despite the B24 being a > > > > > techically superior aircraft that would beat the B17 > > > > > in "almost every catagory of comparison" he would > > > > > alway chose to take his chances in the B17. He said > > > > > that something just made the B17 better the way an > > > > > athlete may excel without you being able to "define" > > > > > what made him different. > > > > > > > > > > I hope that some of you fellas can help "define" the > > > > > advantages of the B17. Some questions to help spark > > > > > the conversation would be: Why were the B17s bombing > > > > > from 25-30,000 feet when the Liberators were bombing > > > > > at much lower altitudes? Also, can any of you > > > > > engineering types point to specific design differences > > > > > that would account for the B17s ability to withstand > > > > > more punishment and still fly? I suspect that the B24 > > > > > was built to lift greater loads and maybe even stretch > > > > > the envelope on range at the expense of making it a > > > > > bit more fragile(ie larger fuel capacity, over wing > > > > > design to increase lift, etc.). Anyway, I'm guessing > > > > > here and would like some "first hand info". > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Steve Hollifield > > > > > > > > > > Son of Robert G. Hollifield > > > > > 303rd BG 358th Sqd. (April 44 -- July 44) > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > > > > Do You Yahoo!? > > > > > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail > > > > > http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 17 17:05:06 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (William Heller) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 09:05:06 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Hist. Chan. Suicide Missions(Flying the Ball) References: Message-ID: <3B546233.3D612278@attglobal.net> Jack, my friend .... We are two old farts who are still working. I went back due to mere boredom even though Ruth keeps me jumping now and then. I went to work for two months to see how it felt, and that was over two years ago! My doctor LOVES it. Says it does me good. Until next we meet, Cheers, old buddy! WCH Jprencher@aol.com wrote: > Bill, Dear Friend, > I agree with you completely on your weight information. Thank you. I > also think you know more about airplanes and the theory of flight than anyone > I have ever met and I really mean that. I think you are what makes this > forum so interesting. Your knowledge of aircraft is a rare jewel that I hope > all of us appreciate. We are all blessed to have access to your knowledge and > experience. I look forward to talking with you again in Washington. That is > were we get all kinds of things straightened out. Off I go to work IF I can > get my old Subaru on the step between here and the shop? > Very Best Wishes, > Jack Rencher From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 17 17:16:59 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Pierce, Gregory S) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 09:16:59 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] 8th AAF Questions Message-ID: <11A611A7F867C24EB1968E0D60B6E7BC02D1E2D9@XCH-NW-04.nw.nos.boeing.com> Hello Gentleman, saw this note in "Flight Journal" magazine. Thought some of you might like correspond with this person. Regards Greg Pierce 8th AFHS President - WA Chapter E-mail Gregory.Pierce@PSS.Boeing.com Attn: Former 8th AAF Members I wonder whether any of your readers who were in the 8th AAF as B-17 flight or ground personnel will be able to help me unravel a better kept secret than the A-bomb. For part of the background for a novel I am toying with the idea of writing, I need to know how the various members of the flight and ground crews were selected for their duties. Where did they train and for how long? When did the crew and plane come together? Do any readers have training anecdotes they would like to share? Further, if people would like to tell me about their post combat experiences, I'd like to hear from them. They can reach me at; wmunkelwi@aol.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 17 22:48:33 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 16:48:33 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] To Bill Heller Message-ID: That is fantastic about your two cousins in the Luftwaffe! Did you ever communicate with them before the war, did you know each other, and did they know you were in the 8th? Kevin >From: William Heller >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] To Bill Heller >Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 09:02:13 -0700 > >Kevin Pearson ... > >I did not notice any different feelings toward me when Germans learned that >I >was one of those bombers .... But, I was usually with my Lufthanas friends, >and >this may have tempered any feelings a bit. On the other hand, I was German >and >my use of the language perhaps also tempered it a bit. In the end, however, >I >am certain the Germans knew very well that defeat was someting with which >they >had to live. To this day, the war notwithstanding, I believe the Germans >are a >good ally of ours. Recall, how the Brits were the same and we sort of >kicked >their butt, too, way back in the revolutionary days and the ensuing 1812 >gambit. > >To answer your query, no, I never did notice any rancor or bad feeling ... >though who knows what may have been beneath the surface when some people >met me >and knew from whence I came. > >And, if you did not know it, I had two cousins flying against me in the >Luftwaffe. One of whom flew with me in my littel plane in the States prior >to >his going back to Germany before the war. Both were KIA. One in me109s and >the >other in FW190s. > >But, we won. And for that all Americans should be very happy, for the other >result would have been disastrous. > >Cheers! > >Bill Heller > >Kevin Pearson wrote: > > > Bill: Thanks for the infomation! Very interesting about the DC10s. I > > remember those crashes, but I was still a pretty young pup back then. > > > > And a 747 Captain, you have my ultimate respect! I can not imagine >getting > > paid to go fly everyday! I learned to fly before I learned to drive, >have > > always loved it, but I got glasses my sophomore year in high school, the > > same year the Vietnam War ended, and the military would not take me into > > their training program. Every day when I look up in the sky and see a > > contrail, I think about two things - how I should have payed for my >flight > > training myself, and what 2,500 contrails must have looked like from the > > German side of the war. I read somerwhere that the first time the 8th >went > > to Berlin, the bomber stream was 90 miles long, a mile wide and a >quarter > > mile high. You are quite correct when you say we decimated Germany by >shear > > numbers. The home front did their job well. Somewhere along the lines >we > > lost that sense of national purpose. > > > > Did you ever meet with any hostility by the Germans following the war >when > > the learned you bombed their cities? I'm sure your Luftwaffe associates > > understood, but how about everyone else? Facinating topic. > > > > Thanks again for the reply! > > Kevin > > > > >From: William Heller > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] To Bill Heller > > >Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 23:23:35 -0700 > > > > > >Kevin Pearson ... > > > > > >I flew for Lufthasa as Captain and Member of the Luftfahrtbundesamt >from > > >1956 > > >to 1965. I flew the Connie and was finally checked out on the 707 but >left > > >Lufthansa for my next assignment which was in DC8s and DC10s and finaly > > >747. > > >Worlwide as both Captain, And Check Captain/Supervisory Captain. > > > > > >Am not aware of any Connie crashes any more than other types at various > > >times. > > >For example the first DC6s had a rash of cashes before they learned the > > >vent > > >line fuel was flowing into the cabin air heater intake! And the 707 >before > > >the > > >ventral fin and the extenion to vertical stablizer hieght, had a lot of > > >losses. They had trouble with Vmc due to this lack of longitudical > > >control. > > >TWA alone lost several at their traingin base in Atlantic City in the >early > > >60s. > > > > > >Pilot error will always be around, but in many cases is exacerbated >with > > >problems which were inherent but not found in time by the engineers in >the > > >factories. The DC10-10 model is a case in point. While louvres were >placed > > >in > > >the cockpit door which had to be opened in flight, NO louvres were >placed > > >in > > >the floor. So that, for example, when the Turkish Airlines crashed >outside > > >Paris due to a cargo door blowing open, it was actually the FLOOR which > > >collapsed, due to pressure differential between upper cabin and cargo >area > > >... > > >onto the hydraulic control lines which caused the crash. The DC10-30 >having > > >a > > >cargo floor (being a convertible model) would not have had this >problem. > > >But, > > >in the end, cargo doors were supposed to be closed PROPERLY and if they > > >were > > >they would NOT blow off! More error. So you see, the factory engineers >were > > >concerned about possible explosive decompression in the cabin OR >cockpit > > >and > > >thus LOUVRED the door so pressure would be equalized instead of the >door > > >becoming a missile in one direction or the other. > > > > > >Cheers! > > > > > >Bill Heller > > > > > >Kevin Pearson wrote: > > > > > > > Bill: When did you fly for Lufthansa and did you ever fly the >Lockheed > > > > Constellation? In looking over some of the airplane crashs web >sites, > > >the > > > > Constellation appears to have crashed more than about any other > > >airliner. I > > > > have heard the Constellation, like the B-29, had problems with >engine > > >fires > > > > when going from low to high blower, but many of the accidents appear >to > > >be > > > > pilot error. Realizing that weather forecasting was not as it now >is, > > > > coupled with the reliability of the jet engine and improvements in > > > > navigation, do you know of other reasons why the Conny crashed so >much. > > >By > > > > the way, we have a Conny at the Kansas City Downtown Airport that >does > > >the > > > > air show circuit. She is a beautiful machine, second only to the > > >Fortress > > > > in my book. > > > > Kevin > > > > > > > > >From: William Heller > > > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Hist. Chan. Suicide Missions(Flying the >Ball) > > > > >Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 09:33:25 -0700 > > > > > > > > > >Steve Hollifield ... > > > > > > > > > >Putting aside various people's penchant for liking or disliking > > > > >something regardless of facts mentioned pro or con ... we must >realize > > > > >some reasons WHY the difference between the B24 and the B17. First >of > > > > >all altitude: The B17 wing had no camber. It was the same shape on >top > > > > >as on bottom. This fact should make a mockery of Bernouli's Theorm, > > > > >however the wing was attached to the fuselage at an angle of >incidence > > > > >of 3%. This fact gave it the airflow necessary to make Bernouli's > > >Theorm > > > > >work, but also allowed the B17 to fly at higher altitudes. The B24 >had > > >a > > > > >Davis Wing and could not fly at the altitudes at which the B17 >flew. > > > > >The B24 could carry heavier loads and also fly abit faster. Suffice >it > > > > >to say, at any B17 mission briefing, when we were told B24s would >be in > > > > >the bomber column, cheers went up from the group being briefed ... >for > > > > >they knew the Luftwaffe would attack the B24 first, due to flying >below > > > > >the B17s. Also, this fact is firmed by the Luftwaffe friends of >mine > > > > >during my Lufthansa tenure as a Captain. They also said they liked >to > > > > >attack the B24 at the wing root, for this was one of the weakest >points > > > > >in the airplane. I personally saw several B24s attacked in this >manner, > > > > >and, indeed, their wings immediately folded up. > > > > > > > > > >I will not dwell on the "political" side of this, but it WAS heard >in > > > > >certain circles, that with the B17 becoming so famous in Europe >that > > > > >Consolidated also wanted THEIR airplane in theatre. That could be >an > > >old > > > > >wive's tale, BUT, it bears some thought. > > > > > > > > > >In conclusion, and as many of my Luftwaffe friends told me ... they > > >were > > > > >constantly beaten by sheer NUMBERS and if the B24 added to this >factor, > > > > >then it did its job. > > > > > > > > > >I recall mentioning to my Luftwaffe friends that it was never >WHETHER > > >we > > > > >would win, but WHEN. They mentioned that they did not have the >luxury > > >to > > > > >have these thoughts, for they were always fighting to retain ground > > >they > > > > >were losing. > > > > > > > > > >Many of our friends may have some other ideas on your query. The >above > > > > >is mine. > > > > > > > > > >Cheers! > > > > > > > > > >Bill Heller > > > > > > > > > >Steve Hollifield wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I know this group has fielded discussions before > > > > > > concerning the History Channel's Ball Turret > > > > > > documentary. I saw the show last night for the first > > > > > > time, and I have a question concerning Andy Rooney's > > > > > > comments comparing the B17 to the B24. Mr Rooney was > > > > > > saying (and I paraphrase)that despite the B24 being a > > > > > > techically superior aircraft that would beat the B17 > > > > > > in "almost every catagory of comparison" he would > > > > > > alway chose to take his chances in the B17. He said > > > > > > that something just made the B17 better the way an > > > > > > athlete may excel without you being able to "define" > > > > > > what made him different. > > > > > > > > > > > > I hope that some of you fellas can help "define" the > > > > > > advantages of the B17. Some questions to help spark > > > > > > the conversation would be: Why were the B17s bombing > > > > > > from 25-30,000 feet when the Liberators were bombing > > > > > > at much lower altitudes? Also, can any of you > > > > > > engineering types point to specific design differences > > > > > > that would account for the B17s ability to withstand > > > > > > more punishment and still fly? I suspect that the B24 > > > > > > was built to lift greater loads and maybe even stretch > > > > > > the envelope on range at the expense of making it a > > > > > > bit more fragile(ie larger fuel capacity, over wing > > > > > > design to increase lift, etc.). Anyway, I'm guessing > > > > > > here and would like some "first hand info". > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Steve Hollifield > > > > > > > > > > > > Son of Robert G. Hollifield > > > > > > 303rd BG 358th Sqd. (April 44 -- July 44) > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > > > > > Do You Yahoo!? > > > > > > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail > > > > > > http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > > > > > > > > > >Steve Hollifield wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I know this group has fielded discussions before > > > > > > concerning the History Channel's Ball Turret > > > > > > documentary. I saw the show last night for the first > > > > > > time, and I have a question concerning Andy Rooney's > > > > > > comments comparing the B17 to the B24. Mr Rooney was > > > > > > saying (and I paraphrase)that despite the B24 being a > > > > > > techically superior aircraft that would beat the B17 > > > > > > in "almost every catagory of comparison" he would > > > > > > alway chose to take his chances in the B17. He said > > > > > > that something just made the B17 better the way an > > > > > > athlete may excel without you being able to "define" > > > > > > what made him different. > > > > > > > > > > > > I hope that some of you fellas can help "define" the > > > > > > advantages of the B17. Some questions to help spark > > > > > > the conversation would be: Why were the B17s bombing > > > > > > from 25-30,000 feet when the Liberators were bombing > > > > > > at much lower altitudes? Also, can any of you > > > > > > engineering types point to specific design differences > > > > > > that would account for the B17s ability to withstand > > > > > > more punishment and still fly? I suspect that the B24 > > > > > > was built to lift greater loads and maybe even stretch > > > > > > the envelope on range at the expense of making it a > > > > > > bit more fragile(ie larger fuel capacity, over wing > > > > > > design to increase lift, etc.). Anyway, I'm guessing > > > > > > here and would like some "first hand info". > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Steve Hollifield > > > > > > > > > > > > Son of Robert G. Hollifield > > > > > > 303rd BG 358th Sqd. (April 44 -- July 44) > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > > > > > Do You Yahoo!? > > > > > > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail > > > > > > http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 18 03:33:43 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 22:33:43 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] RE: B17 vs B24 Message-ID: <49.dfdfe8e.28864f87@aol.com> --part1_49.dfdfe8e.28864f87_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Throughout aviation history, pilots, crewmen, and even ground crewmen, developed a fondness and devotion for their planes no matter how they stacked up against others. Every airplane has had at least one flying characteristic that is better than all others. Suffice it to say this debate can go on forever. Besides, the proof is in the pudding. The B17 and B24 both did the job, along with the B25, B26, P47, and the rest. The B17's popularity was established long before the United States entered World War Two. My grandfather, the late Colonel Ford J. Lauer, established the 303rd Bomb Group and was its first commander in 1942. Colonel Lauer was one of the Air Corp's pioneer four engine pilots. He was with the 2nd Bomb Group at Langley Field in 1937 when Boeing delivered the first of the original thirteen Y1B17s. Colonel (later General) Robert Olds (General Robin Old's father) was the group commander. Colonel Lauer was only a 1st Lt. then, with twelve years of Air Corps flying behind him. Promotions were few and far between before the war. Also in the 2nd BG, was a 1st Lt. by the name of Curtis E. LeMay. Need I say more about him? The 2nd BG had a long row to hoe with those first generation B17s. Those first B17s were new and revolutionary technology in 1937. Colonel Olds picked the "cream of the pilot crop" to fly them. He demanded that all his pilots be not just qualified, but razor sharp at flying, navigating, bombardier, radio, and gunnery. The high altitude precision bombing technique was pioneered by the 2nd BG during 1937 to 1940. The long distance precision navigation and formation flying was also. Those were tough days for the men of the 2nd BG, because no person wanted them to succeed. The concept of the B17 was "sold" to congress as a weapon to defend the shores of the United States. Not merely as a stationary coastal fortress, but as a "flying fortress." That is where the name originated (most think someone arbitrarily said the plane looked like a fortress with all those guns). America was an isolationist nation in those days. Money was not to be wasted on offensive weapons. Of course Colonel Olds and his men saw the B17s value as an offensive weapon, and they developed it as such. They just didn't speak loudly about it. Now the Navy battleship admirals didn't like those flying fortresses of the 2nd BG at all. They cried foul- that the Air Corps was encroaching upon their territory. After all, the Navy had protected America's coasts since the beginning, and didn't need any help from the Air Corps. Also, in those days the Air Corps was a part of and controlled by the Army. The army was run by old infantry and Calvary generals. They refused to view the airplane as an independent weapon. In their eyes, airplanes were to be used by battlefield commanders for observation, or ground attack to support troops on the ground. Those men of the 2nd fought every minute of every day just to keep themselves funded. They took great pains to obtain public support, because the public was not controlled by the army or navy, and they had the ears of congress. Every chance they got, the 2nd made public appearances all over America and the world. And the B17 became popular with the public long before December of 1941. It is highly likely that the Army generals and Navy admirals would have eventually been able to scrap the B17 project. It continued most likely because President Roosevelt and those in congress with brains saw the impending war coming. If I have said anything that is inaccurate, I apologize. I write this from memory of 30 years of research and reading. Ford J. Lauer III --part1_49.dfdfe8e.28864f87_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Throughout aviation history, pilots, crewmen, and even ground crewmen,
developed a fondness and devotion for their planes no matter how they stacked
up against others. Every airplane has had at least one flying characteristic
that is better than all others. Suffice it to say this debate can go on
forever. Besides, the proof is in the pudding. The B17 and B24 both did the
job, along with the B25, B26, P47, and the rest. The B17's popularity was
established long before the United States entered World War Two. My
grandfather, the late Colonel Ford J. Lauer, established the 303rd Bomb Group
and was its first commander in 1942. Colonel Lauer was one of the Air Corp's
pioneer four engine pilots. He was with the 2nd Bomb Group at Langley Field
in 1937 when Boeing delivered the first of the original thirteen Y1B17s.
Colonel (later General) Robert Olds (General Robin Old's father) was the
group commander. Colonel Lauer was only a 1st Lt. then, with twelve years of
Air Corps flying behind him. Promotions were few and far between before the
war. Also in the 2nd BG, was a 1st Lt. by the name of Curtis E. LeMay. Need I
say more about him? The 2nd BG had a long row to hoe with those first
generation B17s. Those first B17s were new and revolutionary technology in
1937. Colonel Olds picked the "cream of the pilot crop" to fly them. He
demanded that all his pilots be not just qualified, but razor sharp at
flying, navigating, bombardier, radio, and gunnery. The high altitude
precision bombing technique was pioneered by the 2nd BG during 1937 to 1940.
The long distance precision navigation and formation flying was also. Those
were tough days for the men of the 2nd BG, because no person wanted them to
succeed. The concept of the B17 was "sold" to congress as a weapon to defend
the shores of the United States. Not merely as a stationary coastal fortress,
but as a "flying fortress." That is where the name originated (most think
someone arbitrarily said the plane looked like a fortress with all those
guns). America was an isolationist nation in those days. Money was not to be
wasted on offensive weapons. Of course Colonel Olds and his men saw the B17s
value as an offensive weapon, and they developed it as such. They just didn't
speak loudly about it. Now the Navy battleship admirals didn't like those
flying fortresses of the 2nd BG at all. They cried foul- that the Air Corps
was encroaching upon their territory. After all, the Navy had protected
America's coasts since the beginning, and didn't need any help from the Air
Corps. Also, in those days the Air Corps was a part of and controlled by the
Army. The army was run by old infantry and Calvary generals. They refused to
view the airplane as an independent weapon. In their eyes, airplanes were to
be used by battlefield commanders for observation, or ground attack to
support troops on the ground. Those men of the 2nd fought every minute of
every day just to keep themselves funded. They took great pains to obtain
public support, because the public was not controlled by the army or navy,
and they had the ears of congress. Every chance they got, the 2nd made public
appearances all over America and the world. And the B17 became popular with
the public long before December of 1941. It is highly likely that the Army
generals and Navy admirals would have eventually been able to scrap the B17
project. It continued most likely because President Roosevelt and those in
congress with brains saw the impending war coming. If I have said anything
that is inaccurate, I apologize. I write this from memory of 30 years of
research and reading.

Ford J. Lauer III --part1_49.dfdfe8e.28864f87_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 18 06:25:28 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Bill Hoyt) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 23:25:28 -0600 Subject: [303rd-Talk] re:just how close Message-ID: <00ee01c10f4a$0eae8740$10d90b3f@hoytwma2> Thanks Bob for the reply on the four abreast. From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 18 06:35:50 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Bill Hoyt) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 23:35:50 -0600 Subject: [303rd-Talk] B24 compared to B17 Message-ID: <00f101c10f4b$8156d580$10d90b3f@hoytwma2> Bill Runnels I overheard my dad (Otis A Hoyt nav 360 ) when I was a little kid,telling a buddy of his that they always were glad when they flew with 24s because the Luftwaffe would go after them (24) first. His friend was Bob Misener. They met in Casper after their tours. Bob flew B-24s. Bill Hoyt From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 18 07:34:40 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Rich Young) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 23:34:40 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Mission 250 Message-ID: I've recently finished reading the book "Target Berlin" Mission 250:6 March 1944. This book gives points of view of many participants on both sides and how they were impacted or influenced by this first Berlin raid. I wonder who on this list may have taken part on this particular mission and if you have any special recollections or experiences you might wish to share. Regards, ÒÒÒÒÒÒ Richard Young From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 18 07:53:20 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (William Heller) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 23:53:20 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] To Bill Heller References: Message-ID: <3B553260.90E67311@attglobal.net> Kevin Pearson ... Yes I knew both my cousins and the one, Richard (pronounced Ree-Schard) flew with me in my little plane in the States prior to the war before he went back to Germany. Many of my friends in Lufthansa knew them as well. No, I do not believe they knew I was in thed 8th for we had NO contact with our family immediately prior to or right after the war. Cheers! Bill Heller Kevin Pearson wrote: > That is fantastic about your two cousins in the Luftwaffe! Did you ever > communicate with them before the war, did you know each other, and did they > know you were in the 8th? > Kevin > > >From: William Heller > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] To Bill Heller > >Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 09:02:13 -0700 > > > >Kevin Pearson ... > > > >I did not notice any different feelings toward me when Germans learned that > >I > >was one of those bombers .... But, I was usually with my Lufthanas friends, > >and > >this may have tempered any feelings a bit. On the other hand, I was German > >and > >my use of the language perhaps also tempered it a bit. In the end, however, > >I > >am certain the Germans knew very well that defeat was someting with which > >they > >had to live. To this day, the war notwithstanding, I believe the Germans > >are a > >good ally of ours. Recall, how the Brits were the same and we sort of > >kicked > >their butt, too, way back in the revolutionary days and the ensuing 1812 > >gambit. > > > >To answer your query, no, I never did notice any rancor or bad feeling ... > >though who knows what may have been beneath the surface when some people > >met me > >and knew from whence I came. > > > >And, if you did not know it, I had two cousins flying against me in the > >Luftwaffe. One of whom flew with me in my littel plane in the States prior > >to > >his going back to Germany before the war. Both were KIA. One in me109s and > >the > >other in FW190s. > > > >But, we won. And for that all Americans should be very happy, for the other > >result would have been disastrous. > > > >Cheers! > > > >Bill Heller > > > >Kevin Pearson wrote: > > > > > Bill: Thanks for the infomation! Very interesting about the DC10s. I > > > remember those crashes, but I was still a pretty young pup back then. > > > > > > And a 747 Captain, you have my ultimate respect! I can not imagine > >getting > > > paid to go fly everyday! I learned to fly before I learned to drive, > >have > > > always loved it, but I got glasses my sophomore year in high school, the > > > same year the Vietnam War ended, and the military would not take me into > > > their training program. Every day when I look up in the sky and see a > > > contrail, I think about two things - how I should have payed for my > >flight > > > training myself, and what 2,500 contrails must have looked like from the > > > German side of the war. I read somerwhere that the first time the 8th > >went > > > to Berlin, the bomber stream was 90 miles long, a mile wide and a > >quarter > > > mile high. You are quite correct when you say we decimated Germany by > >shear > > > numbers. The home front did their job well. Somewhere along the lines > >we > > > lost that sense of national purpose. > > > > > > Did you ever meet with any hostility by the Germans following the war > >when > > > the learned you bombed their cities? I'm sure your Luftwaffe associates > > > understood, but how about everyone else? Facinating topic. > > > > > > Thanks again for the reply! > > > Kevin > > > > > > >From: William Heller > > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] To Bill Heller > > > >Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 23:23:35 -0700 > > > > > > > >Kevin Pearson ... > > > > > > > >I flew for Lufthasa as Captain and Member of the Luftfahrtbundesamt > >from > > > >1956 > > > >to 1965. I flew the Connie and was finally checked out on the 707 but > >left > > > >Lufthansa for my next assignment which was in DC8s and DC10s and finaly > > > >747. > > > >Worlwide as both Captain, And Check Captain/Supervisory Captain. > > > > > > > >Am not aware of any Connie crashes any more than other types at various > > > >times. > > > >For example the first DC6s had a rash of cashes before they learned the > > > >vent > > > >line fuel was flowing into the cabin air heater intake! And the 707 > >before > > > >the > > > >ventral fin and the extenion to vertical stablizer hieght, had a lot of > > > >losses. They had trouble with Vmc due to this lack of longitudical > > > >control. > > > >TWA alone lost several at their traingin base in Atlantic City in the > >early > > > >60s. > > > > > > > >Pilot error will always be around, but in many cases is exacerbated > >with > > > >problems which were inherent but not found in time by the engineers in > >the > > > >factories. The DC10-10 model is a case in point. While louvres were > >placed > > > >in > > > >the cockpit door which had to be opened in flight, NO louvres were > >placed > > > >in > > > >the floor. So that, for example, when the Turkish Airlines crashed > >outside > > > >Paris due to a cargo door blowing open, it was actually the FLOOR which > > > >collapsed, due to pressure differential between upper cabin and cargo > >area > > > >... > > > >onto the hydraulic control lines which caused the crash. The DC10-30 > >having > > > >a > > > >cargo floor (being a convertible model) would not have had this > >problem. > > > >But, > > > >in the end, cargo doors were supposed to be closed PROPERLY and if they > > > >were > > > >they would NOT blow off! More error. So you see, the factory engineers > >were > > > >concerned about possible explosive decompression in the cabin OR > >cockpit > > > >and > > > >thus LOUVRED the door so pressure would be equalized instead of the > >door > > > >becoming a missile in one direction or the other. > > > > > > > >Cheers! > > > > > > > >Bill Heller > > > > > > > >Kevin Pearson wrote: > > > > > > > > > Bill: When did you fly for Lufthansa and did you ever fly the > >Lockheed > > > > > Constellation? In looking over some of the airplane crashs web > >sites, > > > >the > > > > > Constellation appears to have crashed more than about any other > > > >airliner. I > > > > > have heard the Constellation, like the B-29, had problems with > >engine > > > >fires > > > > > when going from low to high blower, but many of the accidents appear > >to > > > >be > > > > > pilot error. Realizing that weather forecasting was not as it now > >is, > > > > > coupled with the reliability of the jet engine and improvements in > > > > > navigation, do you know of other reasons why the Conny crashed so > >much. > > > >By > > > > > the way, we have a Conny at the Kansas City Downtown Airport that > >does > > > >the > > > > > air show circuit. She is a beautiful machine, second only to the > > > >Fortress > > > > > in my book. > > > > > Kevin > > > > > > > > > > >From: William Heller > > > > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > > > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Hist. Chan. Suicide Missions(Flying the > >Ball) > > > > > >Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 09:33:25 -0700 > > > > > > > > > > > >Steve Hollifield ... > > > > > > > > > > > >Putting aside various people's penchant for liking or disliking > > > > > >something regardless of facts mentioned pro or con ... we must > >realize > > > > > >some reasons WHY the difference between the B24 and the B17. First > >of > > > > > >all altitude: The B17 wing had no camber. It was the same shape on > >top > > > > > >as on bottom. This fact should make a mockery of Bernouli's Theorm, > > > > > >however the wing was attached to the fuselage at an angle of > >incidence > > > > > >of 3%. This fact gave it the airflow necessary to make Bernouli's > > > >Theorm > > > > > >work, but also allowed the B17 to fly at higher altitudes. The B24 > >had > > > >a > > > > > >Davis Wing and could not fly at the altitudes at which the B17 > >flew. > > > > > >The B24 could carry heavier loads and also fly abit faster. Suffice > >it > > > > > >to say, at any B17 mission briefing, when we were told B24s would > >be in > > > > > >the bomber column, cheers went up from the group being briefed ... > >for > > > > > >they knew the Luftwaffe would attack the B24 first, due to flying > >below > > > > > >the B17s. Also, this fact is firmed by the Luftwaffe friends of > >mine > > > > > >during my Lufthansa tenure as a Captain. They also said they liked > >to > > > > > >attack the B24 at the wing root, for this was one of the weakest > >points > > > > > >in the airplane. I personally saw several B24s attacked in this > >manner, > > > > > >and, indeed, their wings immediately folded up. > > > > > > > > > > > >I will not dwell on the "political" side of this, but it WAS heard > >in > > > > > >certain circles, that with the B17 becoming so famous in Europe > >that > > > > > >Consolidated also wanted THEIR airplane in theatre. That could be > >an > > > >old > > > > > >wive's tale, BUT, it bears some thought. > > > > > > > > > > > >In conclusion, and as many of my Luftwaffe friends told me ... they > > > >were > > > > > >constantly beaten by sheer NUMBERS and if the B24 added to this > >factor, > > > > > >then it did its job. > > > > > > > > > > > >I recall mentioning to my Luftwaffe friends that it was never > >WHETHER > > > >we > > > > > >would win, but WHEN. They mentioned that they did not have the > >luxury > > > >to > > > > > >have these thoughts, for they were always fighting to retain ground > > > >they > > > > > >were losing. > > > > > > > > > > > >Many of our friends may have some other ideas on your query. The > >above > > > > > >is mine. > > > > > > > > > > > >Cheers! > > > > > > > > > > > >Bill Heller > > > > > > > > > > > >Steve Hollifield wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know this group has fielded discussions before > > > > > > > concerning the History Channel's Ball Turret > > > > > > > documentary. I saw the show last night for the first > > > > > > > time, and I have a question concerning Andy Rooney's > > > > > > > comments comparing the B17 to the B24. Mr Rooney was > > > > > > > saying (and I paraphrase)that despite the B24 being a > > > > > > > techically superior aircraft that would beat the B17 > > > > > > > in "almost every catagory of comparison" he would > > > > > > > alway chose to take his chances in the B17. He said > > > > > > > that something just made the B17 better the way an > > > > > > > athlete may excel without you being able to "define" > > > > > > > what made him different. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I hope that some of you fellas can help "define" the > > > > > > > advantages of the B17. Some questions to help spark > > > > > > > the conversation would be: Why were the B17s bombing > > > > > > > from 25-30,000 feet when the Liberators were bombing > > > > > > > at much lower altitudes? Also, can any of you > > > > > > > engineering types point to specific design differences > > > > > > > that would account for the B17s ability to withstand > > > > > > > more punishment and still fly? I suspect that the B24 > > > > > > > was built to lift greater loads and maybe even stretch > > > > > > > the envelope on range at the expense of making it a > > > > > > > bit more fragile(ie larger fuel capacity, over wing > > > > > > > design to increase lift, etc.). Anyway, I'm guessing > > > > > > > here and would like some "first hand info". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > Steve Hollifield > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Son of Robert G. Hollifield > > > > > > > 303rd BG 358th Sqd. (April 44 -- July 44) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > > > > > > Do You Yahoo!? > > > > > > > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail > > > > > > > http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > > > > > > > > > > > >Steve Hollifield wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know this group has fielded discussions before > > > > > > > concerning the History Channel's Ball Turret > > > > > > > documentary. I saw the show last night for the first > > > > > > > time, and I have a question concerning Andy Rooney's > > > > > > > comments comparing the B17 to the B24. Mr Rooney was > > > > > > > saying (and I paraphrase)that despite the B24 being a > > > > > > > techically superior aircraft that would beat the B17 > > > > > > > in "almost every catagory of comparison" he would > > > > > > > alway chose to take his chances in the B17. He said > > > > > > > that something just made the B17 better the way an > > > > > > > athlete may excel without you being able to "define" > > > > > > > what made him different. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I hope that some of you fellas can help "define" the > > > > > > > advantages of the B17. Some questions to help spark > > > > > > > the conversation would be: Why were the B17s bombing > > > > > > > from 25-30,000 feet when the Liberators were bombing > > > > > > > at much lower altitudes? Also, can any of you > > > > > > > engineering types point to specific design differences > > > > > > > that would account for the B17s ability to withstand > > > > > > > more punishment and still fly? I suspect that the B24 > > > > > > > was built to lift greater loads and maybe even stretch > > > > > > > the envelope on range at the expense of making it a > > > > > > > bit more fragile(ie larger fuel capacity, over wing > > > > > > > design to increase lift, etc.). Anyway, I'm guessing > > > > > > > here and would like some "first hand info". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > Steve Hollifield > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Son of Robert G. Hollifield > > > > > > > 303rd BG 358th Sqd. (April 44 -- July 44) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > > > > > > Do You Yahoo!? > > > > > > > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail > > > > > > > http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 18 13:25:30 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 12:25:30 +0000 Subject: [303rd-Talk] B24 compared to B17 Message-ID: <20010718122532.MFDC2154.mtiwmhc26.worldnet.att.net@webmail.worldnet.att.net> Bill, two years ago a number of us ( former B-17 and B- 24 crew members ) provided support to the Collins Foundation B-17 & B-24 when in town. A friend of mine was setting in a chair directly under the B-24 Bombay. I walked over and suggested he move before that pile of junk fell on him. Other B-24 support members heard my comment and politely escorted me back to the B-17. HA HA So you see the rivalry continues even to this date. I have always been grateful for having been assigned to a B-17 crew during the war. However, the B-24 played an important roll as well but don't tell my friends I said that.....Bill Runnels b-17 & > Bill Runnels > I overheard my dad (Otis A Hoyt nav 360 ) when I was a little kid,telling a > buddy of his that they always were glad when they flew with 24s because the > Luftwaffe would go after them (24) first. > His friend was Bob Misener. They met in Casper after their tours. > Bob flew B-24s. > > Bill Hoyt > > > From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 18 14:13:03 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 09:13:03 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: Training flight Message-ID: --part1_d2.97e2022.2886e55f_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Scotts crew on a flight was forced to land, due to weather. We were stationed at Dyersberg, Tenn. I don't remember the field we landed at but it was far north of New Orleans. I had to be back at the base the next morning, a three day pass and to get married. The ball turret gunner and I hitchhike back. We got a ride with some older man into the city. We were let out a block away from the bus terminal With parachutes and in flight gear. No passes (AOL.). We spotted M.P.'s a block away coming in our dirction. So we went into an alley popped our chutes and walked up to the MP's and told them we bailed out and were trying to get back to our base. Boy did we get treated royally. Put on a bus, no cost, and arrived at base. Yeh, I did get married the next afternoon. Bob --part1_d2.97e2022.2886e55f_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Scotts crew on a flight was forced to land, due to weather. We were stationed
at Dyersberg, Tenn. I don't remember the field we landed at but it was far
north of New Orleans. I had to be back at the base the next morning, a three
day pass and to get married. The ball turret gunner and I hitchhike back. We
got a ride with some older man into the city. We were let out a block away
from the bus terminal With parachutes and in flight gear. No passes (AOL.).
We spotted M.P.'s a block away coming in our dirction. So we went into an
alley popped our chutes and walked up to the MP's and told them we bailed out
and were trying to get back to our base. Boy did we get treated royally. Put
on a bus, no cost, and arrived at base. Yeh, I did get married the next
afternoon.
Bob   --part1_d2.97e2022.2886e55f_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 18 14:24:29 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 09:24:29 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] re: just how close Message-ID: <10.fa9a3bf.2886e80d@cs.com> --part1_10.fa9a3bf.2886e80d_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I have a few comments concerning the cheerful appearance of fighter pilots. I believe that you will find the same self assured look on RAF fighter pilots during the Battle of Britain. Due to the inability of the Luftwaffe to gain control of the skies over England, the rather vague German plan to invade Great Britain was canceled. I could be wrong on this, but bomber crews had to fly for several hours to reach and return from a target while fighter pilots flew for considerably less time to defend a particular region. The remarkable difference in expressions could be more the result of fatigue. One wonders how the surviving Luftwaffe bomber crews looked upon their return to the continent after a mission to England. In my experience in the Navy, I found fighter pilots to be distinctly different from the general military population. Also, within the flying community fighter pilots are a unique breed when compared to pilots who prefer to fly straight and level. Best Wishes, John A. Jenkins 6910 Old Redmond Road Redmond, WA 98052 USA Phone (425) 885-0595 --part1_10.fa9a3bf.2886e80d_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit      I have a few comments concerning the cheerful appearance of fighter
pilots.  I believe that you will find the same self assured look on RAF
fighter pilots during the Battle of Britain.  Due to the inability of the
Luftwaffe to gain control of the skies over England, the rather vague German
plan to invade Great Britain was canceled.  I could be wrong on this, but
bomber crews had to fly for several hours to reach and return from a target
while fighter pilots flew for considerably less time to defend a particular
region.  The remarkable difference in expressions could be more the result of
fatigue.  One wonders how the surviving Luftwaffe bomber crews looked upon
their return to the continent after a mission to England.
      In my experience in the Navy, I found fighter pilots to be distinctly
different from the general military population.  Also, within the flying
community fighter pilots are a unique breed when compared to pilots who
prefer to fly straight and level.

Best Wishes,       

John A. Jenkins

6910 Old Redmond Road
Redmond, WA   98052   USA

Phone (425) 885-0595 --part1_10.fa9a3bf.2886e80d_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 18 14:54:16 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Bill Jones) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 09:54:16 -0400 Subject: [303rd-Talk] B24 compared to B17 In-Reply-To: <00f101c10f4b$8156d580$10d90b3f@hoytwma2> Message-ID: > I overheard my dad (Otis A Hoyt nav 360 ) when I was a little kid,telling a > buddy of his that they always were glad when they flew with 24s because the > Luftwaffe would go after them (24) first. > His friend was Bob Misener. They met in Casper after their tours. > Bob flew B-24s. The interesting thing about this topic is that when you listen to B-24 airmen, they say the same thing in reverse, ie that when they flew with B- 17s, that the fighters left them alone and went after the 17's . I know some of this is just pride in the plane you are flying in, but I also wonder whether this had something to do with the sheer numbers that people here have been mentioning. Ie if the B-17s were NOT flying with B-24s (and visa versa), wouldn't it mean that it was a smaller mission, ie less planes going to that target? And with less planes, it would seem logical that the odds were greater that the fighters would come after your group. Whereas, on a BIG mission, where both B-17s and B-24s were involved, perhaps the enemy aircraft were just overwhelmed by the numbers, and to both the B-17s AND the B-24s, it seemed like the resistance was less???? If you look at the plane loss rates per sortie, there is very little difference between the two planes, so if there was any real tendency of the German fighters to go specifically after one type plane, it doesn't seem to show up in the statistics. Is it possible that both B-17 and B-24 crews are right, and it was just safer when both planes flew together? From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 18 16:07:45 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 10:07:45 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] re: just how close Message-ID: Yes, John, you are quite right about fighter pilots being a special breed, and thank God we have them, right Spider? I have seen many pictures of RAF fighter pilots from the Battle of Britain and they have that same, cocky look about them, but most of them look very tired. They were always on alert, day or night, and I'm sure didn't get plenty of rest. Look at the eyes on the bomber crew photos and you will immediately see what I mean. I know being on oxygen for nine or ten hours going to Berlin, coupled with the intensity of a mission would wear a guy out. I think most crew photos were taken before a mission, weren't they guys? It could be the crews were awakened at 2:30 a.m. or 3:30 a.m. for the deep penetration raids, and I know that would make me look haggared, especially doing it several days in a row. And honestly, I would have been scared to death with each mission, and I know fear can take a physical as well as mental toll. Kevin >From: JJENKINSR@cs.com >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: 303rd-talk@303rdbga.com >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] re: just how close >Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 09:24:29 EDT > > I have a few comments concerning the cheerful appearance of fighter >pilots. I believe that you will find the same self assured look on RAF >fighter pilots during the Battle of Britain. Due to the inability of the >Luftwaffe to gain control of the skies over England, the rather vague >German >plan to invade Great Britain was canceled. I could be wrong on this, but >bomber crews had to fly for several hours to reach and return from a target >while fighter pilots flew for considerably less time to defend a particular >region. The remarkable difference in expressions could be more the result >of >fatigue. One wonders how the surviving Luftwaffe bomber crews looked upon >their return to the continent after a mission to England. > In my experience in the Navy, I found fighter pilots to be >distinctly >different from the general military population. Also, within the flying >community fighter pilots are a unique breed when compared to pilots who >prefer to fly straight and level. > >Best Wishes, > >John A. Jenkins > >6910 Old Redmond Road >Redmond, WA 98052 USA > >Phone (425) 885-0595 _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 18 16:16:14 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 10:16:14 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] B24 compared to B17 Message-ID: Hi Bill: You make an interesting point with the statistics, but keep in mind there were two Air Divisions equipped with B-17s and only one Air Division equipped with B-24s. 8th AF B-17s outnumbered B-24s almost 2 to 1 (depends on when during the war), so if the loss rate statistics are roughly the same in number, then the B-24 was almost twice as likely to be shot down. (Don't you just hate statistics?) Kevin >From: "Bill Jones" >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] B24 compared to B17 >Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 09:54:16 -0400 > > > I overheard my dad (Otis A Hoyt nav 360 ) when I was a little >kid,telling a > > buddy of his that they always were glad when they flew with 24s because >the > > Luftwaffe would go after them (24) first. > > His friend was Bob Misener. They met in Casper after their tours. > > Bob flew B-24s. > > The interesting thing about this topic is that when you listen to B-24 >airmen, they say the same thing in reverse, ie that when they flew with B- >17s, that the fighters left them alone and went after the 17's . I know >some of this is just pride in the plane you are flying in, but I also >wonder >whether this had something to do with the sheer numbers that people >here have been mentioning. > Ie if the B-17s were NOT flying with B-24s (and visa versa), wouldn't >it >mean that it was a smaller mission, ie less planes going to that target? >And with less planes, it would seem logical that the odds were greater >that the fighters would come after your group. Whereas, on a BIG >mission, where both B-17s and B-24s were involved, perhaps the enemy >aircraft were just overwhelmed by the numbers, and to both the B-17s >AND the B-24s, it seemed like the resistance was less???? > If you look at the plane loss rates per sortie, there is very little >difference between the two planes, so if there was any real tendency of >the German fighters to go specifically after one type plane, it doesn't >seem to show up in the statistics. > Is it possible that both B-17 and B-24 crews are right, and it was just >safer when both planes flew together? > > > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 18 16:56:34 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Bill Jones) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 11:56:34 -0400 Subject: [303rd-Talk] B24 compared to B17 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On 18 Jul 01, at 10:16, Kevin Pearson wrote: > Hi Bill: You make an interesting point with the statistics, but keep in > mind there were two Air Divisions equipped with B-17s and only one Air > Division equipped with B-24s. 8th AF B-17s outnumbered B-24s almost 2 to 1 > (depends on when during the war), so if the loss rate statistics are roughly > the same in number, then the B-24 was almost twice as likely to be shot > down. (Don't you just hate statistics?) > Kevin (Yes I do hate statistics.) But I was referring to loss rates per sortie, ie they have been adjusted for the number of planes flying. The numbers I've seen are something like 1.4 (plus or minus a few tenths) planes lost for every 100 sorties, for both B-17s and B-24s. Actually the numbers I saw showed that overall the B-24s had a slightly lower overall loss rate, but when you put in only missions where both planes flew to the same target, then they were pretty much the same, and if you included only planes that reached the target, then B-17s were a bit better, but overall there wasn't really a significant difference between the two planes. There was much more difference between different groups of the same type plane than there were between the planes themselves. From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 18 17:07:52 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 11:07:52 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] B24 compared to B17 Message-ID: Very interesting. The ratio to planes lost per 100 missions would appear to be a really good indicator. Any idea where you saw those statistics? I'm working on a story for the next newsletter I do for the Missouri Chapter on this very issue? Kevin >From: "Bill Jones" >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] B24 compared to B17 >Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 11:56:34 -0400 > >On 18 Jul 01, at 10:16, Kevin Pearson wrote: > > > Hi Bill: You make an interesting point with the statistics, but keep in > > mind there were two Air Divisions equipped with B-17s and only one Air > > Division equipped with B-24s. 8th AF B-17s outnumbered B-24s almost 2 >to 1 > > (depends on when during the war), so if the loss rate statistics are >roughly > > the same in number, then the B-24 was almost twice as likely to be shot > > down. (Don't you just hate statistics?) > > Kevin > >(Yes I do hate statistics.) But I was referring to loss rates per sortie, >ie >they have been adjusted for the number of planes flying. The numbers >I've seen are something like 1.4 (plus or minus a few tenths) planes lost >for every 100 sorties, for both B-17s and B-24s. Actually the numbers I >saw showed that overall the B-24s had a slightly lower overall loss rate, >but when you put in only missions where both planes flew to the same >target, then they were pretty much the same, and if you included only >planes that reached the target, then B-17s were a bit better, but overall >there wasn't really a significant difference between the two planes. There >was much more difference between different groups of the same type >plane than there were between the planes themselves. > > > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 18 17:13:35 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 11:13:35 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying Message-ID: Just out of curiosity, what was your favorite food served at your Bomb Group, and what kinds of food did they have? I heard one story from a 44th BG pilot that early in the war they were serving canned chicken that came in 55 gallon drums. He said the canned chicken gave guys a bad case of gas and at altitude, the gas became excrutiatingly painful, that several ships returned to base because of the many stomach aches. Any similar experiences about how food affected you at altitude. And does anyone remember the brand name of the Scotch given following a mission? Was it US or British made? _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 18 17:43:33 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Bill Jones) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 12:43:33 -0400 Subject: [303rd-Talk] B24 compared to B17 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > Very interesting. The ratio to planes lost per 100 missions would appear to > be a really good indicator. Any idea where you saw those statistics? I'm > working on a story for the next newsletter I do for the Missouri Chapter on > this very issue? Actually, the overall statistics that favored B-24s were posted on the "Heavy_Bombers" group a bit more than a year ago. I questioned the accuracy of these, and wondered about how the numbers changed when only missions including both type planes were used, so I used the "Combat Chronology", which can be found many places, including : http://www.altus.af.mil/ho_www/combat.html . This chronology is a day by day listing that says things like 400 B-17s and 200 B-24s were sent to a certain target, and gives numbers for how many actually reached the target, and how many planes were lost, and how many were damaged, etc, etc. Actually, on most missions, the two planes were sent to different targets, but there were quite a few missions that had both planes going to the same target. It is quite a big chronology, so I wasn't able to study the whole war, but I managed to look at the period between Jan and June of 1944, which I thought was pretty representative of when both planes were in the theater, and when both flak and fighters were a threat. It took me a week or two to go through those months, but my overall results agreed with those posted on Heavy_Bombers, but the main conclusion is that while there are some intresting trends, that there really isn't much difference between the two aircraft with respect to loss rates. One of the interesting trends was that there were much fewer "damaged" B-24s, suggesting perhaps that if they were hit they went down, or more likely that the Bomb groups with B-24s had different criteria for reporting damage. The other one is that it seemed like the B-17s were more likely to reach the target, perhaps because they flew above the weather, and thus more of them reached the bad flak/fighter areas. But really the thing that surprised me the most was how close the numbers were for the two planes. It's been two computers since I looked at the data. If I can find it, I'll send it to you. From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 18 17:56:43 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 11:56:43 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] B24 compared to B17 Message-ID: Bill, thanks a lot for the long e-mail. One of our members suggested I write a story about this and I have been trying to find good information. The web site you recommend looks great and I plan to study it in more detail. Thanks again! Kevin >From: "Bill Jones" >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] B24 compared to B17 >Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 12:43:33 -0400 > > > Very interesting. The ratio to planes lost per 100 missions would >appear to > > be a really good indicator. Any idea where you saw those statistics? >I'm > > working on a story for the next newsletter I do for the Missouri Chapter >on > > this very issue? > >Actually, the overall statistics that favored B-24s were posted on the >"Heavy_Bombers" group a bit more than a year ago. I questioned the >accuracy of these, and wondered about how the numbers changed when >only missions including both type planes were used, so I used the >"Combat Chronology", which can be found many places, including : >http://www.altus.af.mil/ho_www/combat.html . >This chronology is a day by day listing that says things like 400 B-17s >and 200 B-24s were sent to a certain target, and gives numbers for how >many actually reached the target, and how many planes were lost, and >how many were damaged, etc, etc. Actually, on most missions, the two >planes were sent to different targets, but there were quite a few missions >that had both planes going to the same target. It is quite a big >chronology, so I wasn't able to study the whole war, but I managed to >look at the period between Jan and June of 1944, which I thought was >pretty representative of when both planes were in the theater, and when >both flak and fighters were a threat. It took me a week or two to go >through those months, but my overall results agreed with those posted >on Heavy_Bombers, but the main conclusion is that while there are some >intresting trends, that there really isn't much difference between the two >aircraft with respect to loss rates. One of the interesting trends was >that >there were much fewer "damaged" B-24s, suggesting perhaps that if they >were hit they went down, or more likely that the Bomb groups with B-24s >had different criteria for reporting damage. The other one is that it >seemed like the B-17s were more likely to reach the target, perhaps >because they flew above the weather, and thus more of them reached the >bad flak/fighter areas. But really the thing that surprised me the most >was how close the numbers were for the two planes. > It's been two computers since I looked at the data. If I can find it, >I'll >send it to you. > > > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 18 18:51:44 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 13:51:44 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] B24 compared to B17 Message-ID: <4f.e67e136.288726b0@aol.com> Bill Jones, The real answer is" It just a bunch of good natured survivors who feel damn lucky to be here kidding each other. Both planes had their faults and their strenghts.We won the war. Not us. Not them, but WE. Best wishes, Jack Rencher From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 18 20:37:54 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Steve Hollifield) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 12:37:54 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [303rd-Talk] B24s vs B17s Message-ID: <20010718193754.26188.qmail@web4503.mail.yahoo.com> With reference to the statistical debate, I have a question. If the loss rates for the entire war was similar between the B24s and B17s, couldn't that indicate that the B17s were in fact a more durable AC. I say this because the B17 debuted earlier in the war when bombing tactics and escorts were in their infancy. Once better fighters and better tactics were developed, it stands to reason that loss rates for both AC would become lower. If that is true, the B17s loss rates are skewed to the high side when compared to the B24s since the B17s on average operated in statistically more dangerous skies. Pewwe, stats stink!!!! But, they are interesting. Steve __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 18 21:42:02 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 15:42:02 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] B24s vs B17s Message-ID: Another skewing factor is that more B-24s were built than B-17s, something like 12,700 B-17s, and 18,000+ B-24s when you add in the Navy variant, the PB4Y-2s. I'm gonna have to leave this debate to someone more knowladgeable than myself in the stats area. There are so many complicating factors, I'm not sure all could accurately be taken into account. As Bill Heller has said, we outproduced Germany and Japan in virtually all areas. And what a tribute to the men and women on the homefront! Kevin >From: Steve Hollifield >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >Subject: [303rd-Talk] B24s vs B17s >Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 12:37:54 -0700 (PDT) > >With reference to the statistical debate, I have a >question. If the loss rates for the entire war was >similar between the B24s and B17s, couldn't that >indicate that the B17s were in fact a more durable AC. > I say this because the B17 debuted earlier in the war >when bombing tactics and escorts were in their >infancy. Once better fighters and better tactics were >developed, it stands to reason that loss rates for >both AC would become lower. If that is true, the B17s >loss rates are skewed to the high side when compared >to the B24s since the B17s on average operated in >statistically more dangerous skies. > >Pewwe, stats stink!!!! But, they are interesting. > >Steve > > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail >http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 18 22:07:59 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (William Heller) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 14:07:59 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] B24s vs B17s References: Message-ID: <3B55FAAE.3DDDF883@attglobal.net> Kevin Pearson ... We have been talking about 17s and 24s as though the ETO was the only theatre in which they participated. It must be remembered that the 24 was very active in the Pacific Theatre. However, the old saying "there goes the crate our B17 came in" is still valid when thinking of the sleekness - or NON SUCH - of the B24. As for stats, I do not think it matters. When I got there they told me the rate of surviving 25 missions was 19%. When I commanded that squadron I told the Ground Exec to NEVER EVER tell such things to a new crew. Cheers! Bill Heller Kevin Pearson wrote: > Another skewing factor is that more B-24s were built than B-17s, something > like 12,700 B-17s, and 18,000+ B-24s when you add in the Navy variant, the > PB4Y-2s. I'm gonna have to leave this debate to someone more knowladgeable > than myself in the stats area. There are so many complicating factors, I'm > not sure all could accurately be taken into account. As Bill Heller has > said, we outproduced Germany and Japan in virtually all areas. And what a > tribute to the men and women on the homefront! > Kevin > > >From: Steve Hollifield > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > >Subject: [303rd-Talk] B24s vs B17s > >Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 12:37:54 -0700 (PDT) > > > >With reference to the statistical debate, I have a > >question. If the loss rates for the entire war was > >similar between the B24s and B17s, couldn't that > >indicate that the B17s were in fact a more durable AC. > > I say this because the B17 debuted earlier in the war > >when bombing tactics and escorts were in their > >infancy. Once better fighters and better tactics were > >developed, it stands to reason that loss rates for > >both AC would become lower. If that is true, the B17s > >loss rates are skewed to the high side when compared > >to the B24s since the B17s on average operated in > >statistically more dangerous skies. > > > >Pewwe, stats stink!!!! But, they are interesting. > > > >Steve > > > > > >__________________________________________________ > >Do You Yahoo!? > >Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail > >http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 18 23:48:38 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Dick Smith) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 15:48:38 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying References: Message-ID: <001401c10fdb$c9f7cfc0$4ff833cf@richards> Kevin: Scotch isn't Scotch if it's made in the USA.We got Bourbon and I gave mine to my Bombardier who really needed it. When I was flying 51's in the Scouting Force we got Chicken which the loaded frozen off the ships on Monday there being no Refrigeration in Blighty at that time when they served it on the following Sunday it was Rotten pull off a leg and it was green inside. We had 24 pilots and on Monday they couldn't find 8 pilots to fly who weren't sick. I upchucked chicken in my oxygen mask . Haven't eaten chicken since then. Spider ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin Pearson" To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 9:13 AM Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > Just out of curiosity, what was your favorite food served at your Bomb > Group, and what kinds of food did they have? I heard one story from a 44th > BG pilot that early in the war they were serving canned chicken that came in > 55 gallon drums. He said the canned chicken gave guys a bad case of gas and > at altitude, the gas became excrutiatingly painful, that several ships > returned to base because of the many stomach aches. Any similar experiences > about how food affected you at altitude. > > And does anyone remember the brand name of the Scotch given following a > mission? Was it US or British made? > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Thu Jul 19 04:20:57 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (hoytwma2) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 21:20:57 -0600 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: B24 compared to B17 (Bill Jones) Message-ID: <007601c11001$d53ad960$9b18183f@hoytwma2> Bill, I was just repeating what my Dad was telling his friend, Im sure too that it wasnt based on any stats, but if seeing some B24s would make you feel safer then you felt safer! Wonder what kind of good luck charm stories are out there. Just as the B17 crews felt safer maybe the Luftwaffe felt they had a better chance of shooting down a B24. I dunno Bill Hoyt From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Thu Jul 19 06:32:02 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (VONDRA BURRELL) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 00:32:02 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Knock Out Dropper Message-ID: ------=_NextPart_001_0001_01C10FEA.3B0C24A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I am seeking surviving crew members of the Knock Out Dropper. ( any of t= he crews ) If you are out there please let me know. Thank you. Lance Burrell ------=_NextPart_001_0001_01C10FEA.3B0C24A0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I am seeking s= urviving crew members of the Knock Out Dropper.  ( any of the crews = ) If you are out there please let me know.  Thank you.
&n= bsp;
Lance Burrell

------=_NextPart_001_0001_01C10FEA.3B0C24A0-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Thu Jul 19 07:49:07 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (William Heller) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 23:49:07 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: B24 compared to B17 (Bill Jones) References: <007601c11001$d53ad960$9b18183f@hoytwma2> Message-ID: <3B5682E2.9E903F91@attglobal.net> Bill Hoyt ... Tempest in a tespot. Cheers! Bill Heller hoytwma2 wrote: > Bill, > I was just repeating what my Dad was telling his friend, Im sure too that it > wasnt based on any stats, but if seeing some B24s would make you feel safer > then you felt safer! Wonder what kind of good luck charm stories are out > there. > Just as the B17 crews felt safer maybe the Luftwaffe felt they had a better > chance of shooting down a B24. I dunno > Bill Hoyt From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Thu Jul 19 14:19:07 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Tooley, Dave) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 08:19:07 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] "Lady be Good" Message-ID: Hi list, Tonight on the History Channel at 8:00 PM Eastern is the story of the B-24 "Lady be Good". It disappeared while returning to Libya after a mission to Italy in '43. The plane was found in '59 deep in the Sahara and several searches were made of the sight and the recovery of bodies. It is an interesting story well worth the viewing. Two good websites are available as well. Quartermaster Graves Registration: Excellent story and pictures. http://www.qmfound.com/lady_be_good_b-24_bomber_recovery.htm 376th BG: http://376hbgva.com/ladybegood.htm I became interested in this story when I discovered that my uncle and the bombardier (John Woravka) for the Lady be Good graduated from the same bombardier class in 1942. Dave From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Thu Jul 19 15:01:56 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 09:01:56 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] B24s vs B17s Message-ID: Bill: 19%!! That's incredible!! How did you deal with that news? Did you just resign yourself to the fact you wouldn't make it? And you were all volonteers. Did you ever think with odds like that that maybe being a ground pounder might not be that bad? 19%! I've read in 42 and 43 survival rates for the 8th as a whole was only 30%, but one in five odds of making it sure must have been depressing. Yes, the B-24 fought with distinction in all theaters, including the MTO and the PTO. In addition, it flew supplies into China and supported the Burma campaign, not to mention flying sub patrols here in the States later in the war. I think the only safe thing we can say about B-17 and B-24 losses is they were too high for each. 19%! I'm not sure how I would have dealt with that, Bill. I guess you gritted your teeth and did what you had to do hoping somehow you'd make it. And can you tell me a little more about the duties of a Squadron Commander? What were you days like? How did you relate to the other crews in your squadron? Thanks for all your comments, Bill! Kevin >From: William Heller >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] B24s vs B17s >Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 14:07:59 -0700 > >Kevin Pearson ... > >We have been talking about 17s and 24s as though the ETO was the only >theatre >in which they participated. It must be remembered that the 24 was very >active >in the Pacific Theatre. However, the old saying "there goes the crate our >B17 >came in" is still valid when thinking of the sleekness - or NON SUCH - of >the >B24. As for stats, I do not think it matters. When I got there they told >me >the rate of surviving 25 missions was 19%. When I commanded that squadron I >told the Ground Exec to NEVER EVER tell such things to a new crew. > >Cheers! > >Bill Heller > >Kevin Pearson wrote: > > > Another skewing factor is that more B-24s were built than B-17s, >something > > like 12,700 B-17s, and 18,000+ B-24s when you add in the Navy variant, >the > > PB4Y-2s. I'm gonna have to leave this debate to someone more >knowladgeable > > than myself in the stats area. There are so many complicating factors, >I'm > > not sure all could accurately be taken into account. As Bill Heller has > > said, we outproduced Germany and Japan in virtually all areas. And what >a > > tribute to the men and women on the homefront! > > Kevin > > > > >From: Steve Hollifield > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > >Subject: [303rd-Talk] B24s vs B17s > > >Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 12:37:54 -0700 (PDT) > > > > > >With reference to the statistical debate, I have a > > >question. If the loss rates for the entire war was > > >similar between the B24s and B17s, couldn't that > > >indicate that the B17s were in fact a more durable AC. > > > I say this because the B17 debuted earlier in the war > > >when bombing tactics and escorts were in their > > >infancy. Once better fighters and better tactics were > > >developed, it stands to reason that loss rates for > > >both AC would become lower. If that is true, the B17s > > >loss rates are skewed to the high side when compared > > >to the B24s since the B17s on average operated in > > >statistically more dangerous skies. > > > > > >Pewwe, stats stink!!!! But, they are interesting. > > > > > >Steve > > > > > > > > >__________________________________________________ > > >Do You Yahoo!? > > >Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail > > >http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Thu Jul 19 15:09:53 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 09:09:53 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying Message-ID: Hi Spider! Yep, that is the same reaction Dave Flint with the 44th BG(H) had, only his chicken wasn't rotten. It was canned and I guess pretty awful. Dave nevertouched chicken again either. So if you threw up in your oxygen mask, didn't that freeze and clog the system? I know nothing about the operation of an oxygen mask, but I heard they were prone to freezing up. Another question: I know how guys took a leak in the bombers, but what did you fighter guys do when nature called? Did you have a bottle or something? And if you did urinate in a bottle, I would think at altitude there would be a lot of steam to fog your canopy? Is this so? I may have asked you this once before, but did you ever know a Tom Liston? He transitioned from 17s to 51s and I believe he was in the Scouting Force, too. He is the former owner of Bergners Department Stores which are popular in Illinois. Kevin >From: "Dick Smith" >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying >Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 15:48:38 -0700 > >Kevin: > Scotch isn't Scotch if it's made in the USA.We got Bourbon and I gave >mine >to my Bombardier who really needed it. When I was flying 51's in the >Scouting Force we got Chicken which the loaded frozen off the ships on >Monday there being no Refrigeration in Blighty at that time when they >served >it on the following Sunday it was Rotten pull off a leg and it was green >inside. We had 24 pilots and on Monday they couldn't find 8 pilots to fly >who weren't sick. I upchucked chicken in my oxygen mask . Haven't eaten >chicken since then. > Spider >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Kevin Pearson" >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> >Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 9:13 AM >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > > > > Just out of curiosity, what was your favorite food served at your Bomb > > Group, and what kinds of food did they have? I heard one story from a >44th > > BG pilot that early in the war they were serving canned chicken that >came >in > > 55 gallon drums. He said the canned chicken gave guys a bad case of gas >and > > at altitude, the gas became excrutiatingly painful, that several ships > > returned to base because of the many stomach aches. Any similar >experiences > > about how food affected you at altitude. > > > > And does anyone remember the brand name of the Scotch given following a > > mission? Was it US or British made? > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > > > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Thu Jul 19 19:15:57 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Dick Smith) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 11:15:57 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying References: Message-ID: <007d01c11080$39b1daa0$6df833cf@richards> Kevin: I took off the mask and dumped it out then it worked fine except for the smell which I'll never forget. We had a pilots releif tube under our seat which had a funnel on a tube which we were supposed to piss in. Pretty tough to do while flying formation .Lots of messy uniforms came home. I don't remember Tom Liston will look him up in the History which was written by Dick Atkins Spider ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin Pearson" To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 7:09 AM Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > Hi Spider! Yep, that is the same reaction Dave Flint with the 44th BG(H) > had, only his chicken wasn't rotten. It was canned and I guess pretty > awful. Dave nevertouched chicken again either. > > So if you threw up in your oxygen mask, didn't that freeze and clog the > system? I know nothing about the operation of an oxygen mask, but I heard > they were prone to freezing up. > > Another question: I know how guys took a leak in the bombers, but what did > you fighter guys do when nature called? Did you have a bottle or something? > And if you did urinate in a bottle, I would think at altitude there would > be a lot of steam to fog your canopy? Is this so? > > I may have asked you this once before, but did you ever know a Tom Liston? > He transitioned from 17s to 51s and I believe he was in the Scouting Force, > too. He is the former owner of Bergners Department Stores which are popular > in Illinois. > Kevin > > > >From: "Dick Smith" > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > >Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 15:48:38 -0700 > > > >Kevin: > > Scotch isn't Scotch if it's made in the USA.We got Bourbon and I gave > >mine > >to my Bombardier who really needed it. When I was flying 51's in the > >Scouting Force we got Chicken which the loaded frozen off the ships on > >Monday there being no Refrigeration in Blighty at that time when they > >served > >it on the following Sunday it was Rotten pull off a leg and it was green > >inside. We had 24 pilots and on Monday they couldn't find 8 pilots to fly > >who weren't sick. I upchucked chicken in my oxygen mask . Haven't eaten > >chicken since then. > > Spider > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Kevin Pearson" > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > >Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 9:13 AM > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > > > > > > > Just out of curiosity, what was your favorite food served at your Bomb > > > Group, and what kinds of food did they have? I heard one story from a > >44th > > > BG pilot that early in the war they were serving canned chicken that > >came > >in > > > 55 gallon drums. He said the canned chicken gave guys a bad case of gas > >and > > > at altitude, the gas became excrutiatingly painful, that several ships > > > returned to base because of the many stomach aches. Any similar > >experiences > > > about how food affected you at altitude. > > > > > > And does anyone remember the brand name of the Scotch given following a > > > mission? Was it US or British made? > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Thu Jul 19 19:38:12 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 13:38:12 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying Message-ID: Spider: Thanks for the info. I'm a pilot and have been since I was 14, now 44, but there is no way I could ever relieved myself in a funnel while flying, let alone flying in formation. And the oxygen mask, couldn't even imagine riding around with that strapped to my face after puking in it. I am quite confident today's generation would not endur the hardships you guys did if we ever had World War III. None of my friends have the intestinal fortitude to do what you all did - pee in a relief tube and breath from a mask you just lost your lunch in. Hell, my generation would have turned back if there wasn't an inflight movie and a computer port in the cockpit. What you guys did still facinates me. I'm also very much impressed with the home front and how this country came together for the first time - what they achieved and what you achieved will be discussed for as long as mankind exists! And it is indeed a real honor to share in your stories! Kevin >From: "Dick Smith" >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying >Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 11:15:57 -0700 > >Kevin: > I took off the mask and dumped it out then it worked fine except for the >smell which I'll never forget. > We had a pilots releif tube under our seat which had a funnel on a tube >which we were supposed to piss in. Pretty tough to do while flying >formation .Lots of messy uniforms came home. > I don't remember Tom Liston will look him up in the History which was >written by Dick Atkins > Spider >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Kevin Pearson" >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> >Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 7:09 AM >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > > > > Hi Spider! Yep, that is the same reaction Dave Flint with the 44th >BG(H) > > had, only his chicken wasn't rotten. It was canned and I guess pretty > > awful. Dave nevertouched chicken again either. > > > > So if you threw up in your oxygen mask, didn't that freeze and clog the > > system? I know nothing about the operation of an oxygen mask, but I >heard > > they were prone to freezing up. > > > > Another question: I know how guys took a leak in the bombers, but what >did > > you fighter guys do when nature called? Did you have a bottle or >something? > > And if you did urinate in a bottle, I would think at altitude there >would > > be a lot of steam to fog your canopy? Is this so? > > > > I may have asked you this once before, but did you ever know a Tom >Liston? > > He transitioned from 17s to 51s and I believe he was in the Scouting >Force, > > too. He is the former owner of Bergners Department Stores which are >popular > > in Illinois. > > Kevin > > > > > > >From: "Dick Smith" > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > > >Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 15:48:38 -0700 > > > > > >Kevin: > > > Scotch isn't Scotch if it's made in the USA.We got Bourbon and I gave > > >mine > > >to my Bombardier who really needed it. When I was flying 51's in the > > >Scouting Force we got Chicken which the loaded frozen off the ships on > > >Monday there being no Refrigeration in Blighty at that time when they > > >served > > >it on the following Sunday it was Rotten pull off a leg and it was >green > > >inside. We had 24 pilots and on Monday they couldn't find 8 pilots to >fly > > >who weren't sick. I upchucked chicken in my oxygen mask . Haven't eaten > > >chicken since then. > > > Spider > > >----- Original Message ----- > > >From: "Kevin Pearson" > > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > > >Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 9:13 AM > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > > > > > > > > > > Just out of curiosity, what was your favorite food served at your >Bomb > > > > Group, and what kinds of food did they have? I heard one story from >a > > >44th > > > > BG pilot that early in the war they were serving canned chicken that > > >came > > >in > > > > 55 gallon drums. He said the canned chicken gave guys a bad case of >gas > > >and > > > > at altitude, the gas became excrutiatingly painful, that several >ships > > > > returned to base because of the many stomach aches. Any similar > > >experiences > > > > about how food affected you at altitude. > > > > > > > > And does anyone remember the brand name of the Scotch given >following >a > > > > mission? Was it US or British made? > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at >http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > > > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Thu Jul 19 19:43:58 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Dick Smith) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 11:43:58 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying References: Message-ID: <009601c11082$c6653940$6df833cf@richards> Kevin : I checked the book and don't find your friends name . Check with Dick Atkins at dick8af@flesh.net Spider ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin Pearson" To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 7:09 AM Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > Hi Spider! Yep, that is the same reaction Dave Flint with the 44th BG(H) > had, only his chicken wasn't rotten. It was canned and I guess pretty > awful. Dave nevertouched chicken again either. > > So if you threw up in your oxygen mask, didn't that freeze and clog the > system? I know nothing about the operation of an oxygen mask, but I heard > they were prone to freezing up. > > Another question: I know how guys took a leak in the bombers, but what did > you fighter guys do when nature called? Did you have a bottle or something? > And if you did urinate in a bottle, I would think at altitude there would > be a lot of steam to fog your canopy? Is this so? > > I may have asked you this once before, but did you ever know a Tom Liston? > He transitioned from 17s to 51s and I believe he was in the Scouting Force, > too. He is the former owner of Bergners Department Stores which are popular > in Illinois. > Kevin > > > >From: "Dick Smith" > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > >Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 15:48:38 -0700 > > > >Kevin: > > Scotch isn't Scotch if it's made in the USA.We got Bourbon and I gave > >mine > >to my Bombardier who really needed it. When I was flying 51's in the > >Scouting Force we got Chicken which the loaded frozen off the ships on > >Monday there being no Refrigeration in Blighty at that time when they > >served > >it on the following Sunday it was Rotten pull off a leg and it was green > >inside. We had 24 pilots and on Monday they couldn't find 8 pilots to fly > >who weren't sick. I upchucked chicken in my oxygen mask . Haven't eaten > >chicken since then. > > Spider > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Kevin Pearson" > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > >Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 9:13 AM > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > > > > > > > Just out of curiosity, what was your favorite food served at your Bomb > > > Group, and what kinds of food did they have? I heard one story from a > >44th > > > BG pilot that early in the war they were serving canned chicken that > >came > >in > > > 55 gallon drums. He said the canned chicken gave guys a bad case of gas > >and > > > at altitude, the gas became excrutiatingly painful, that several ships > > > returned to base because of the many stomach aches. Any similar > >experiences > > > about how food affected you at altitude. > > > > > > And does anyone remember the brand name of the Scotch given following a > > > mission? Was it US or British made? > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Thu Jul 19 19:41:09 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (William Heller) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 11:41:09 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] B24s vs B17s References: Message-ID: <3B5729C6.99622DD5@attglobal.net> Kevin Pearson ... Anent the 19% ... I never proved nor disproved the figures given us in a "welcome" speech. However, when coming home to a 20-bed barracks with 12 empty beds, it sometimes SEEMS true. I did know of the overall 30% figure, but different Groups did suffer varied losses at different times. The 100th Bomb Group comes to mind. Whether or not any crewmember just "resigned" himself to a fate... I cannot know. I do know on certain missions, after seeing other friends being blow up, on fire, or going down ... you often wondered just HOW yhou yourself would "get it" in the vernacular. Were we all scared? YES. I can say to one and all, we were all scared. BUT used various methods of pruning ourselves for what was to come once we entered hostile territory. I, myself, used a facade ... I would sort of jump up and down in my seat and mouth words such as, "Come on up you Luftwaffe! We're waiting for you!" And things such as that. BUT ALL THE TIME I WAS SCARED STIFF! But, it did, in a way, relieve my fears for the moment. And, it made for a few jokes among my crew. Of course, when your squadron loses almost ALL of its airborne force on a given mission, THEN the 19% seems plausible. As mentioned, when I became CO of that squadron, I DID caution the Ground Exec against ever "welcoming" a new crew in that manner. The duties of a Squadron Commander? First, he is first in command of the squadron. As such, conducts staff meetings and generally learns about ALL facets of the squadron effort. Mostly, he is in command of the flying echelon, though in command of ALL! Also, he writes the sad letters to the families to those lost in combat. In this endeavor, he would (at least I did) question barracks mates as to likes and dislikes of the lost comrade ... this so that some little ditty or story could be established in the letter to let the families know how the lost person was liked and known among his combat buddies. The reason for this is that you could not know ALL there was to know about a certain lost crewmember, etc. Also, the squadron commander was required by Army Regulations to be a rated (that is pilot) Officer. He HAD to wear wings. Thus a Ground Exec who usually ran the ground operation, though second in command of the squadron on the ground, would not take over in a temporary loss of the CO. This was done by the Operations Office, who was also rated (a pilot) and thus the Ops Officer was the TRUE second in command. Due to age, most squadron commander's orders read .... By Direction of the President, so-and-so is appointed Commanding Officer of such and such squadron. This was done so that if there WAS another officer in the squadron who outranked the new CO by date-of-rank, it would NOT matter. The new one WAS IN COMMAND due to that insertion in the orders, of BY DIRECTION OF THE PRESIDENT. This was usually reduced to the phrase "BY DP" ... The squadron commander ALSO flys the lead plane in Group, Wing, Division or Air Force Strike Force leads. Such leads are shared at different times by different squadrons. I hope this answers some of your queries. Cheers! Bill Heller Kevin Pearson wrote: > Bill: 19%!! That's incredible!! How did you deal with that news? Did you > just resign yourself to the fact you wouldn't make it? And you were all > volonteers. Did you ever think with odds like that that maybe being a > ground pounder might not be that bad? 19%! I've read in 42 and 43 survival > rates for the 8th as a whole was only 30%, but one in five odds of making it > sure must have been depressing. > > Yes, the B-24 fought with distinction in all theaters, including the MTO and > the PTO. In addition, it flew supplies into China and supported the Burma > campaign, not to mention flying sub patrols here in the States later in the > war. I think the only safe thing we can say about B-17 and B-24 losses is > they were too high for each. > > 19%! I'm not sure how I would have dealt with that, Bill. I guess you > gritted your teeth and did what you had to do hoping somehow you'd make it. > > And can you tell me a little more about the duties of a Squadron Commander? > What were you days like? How did you relate to the other crews in your > squadron? > > Thanks for all your comments, Bill! > Kevin > > >From: William Heller > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] B24s vs B17s > >Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 14:07:59 -0700 > > > >Kevin Pearson ... > > > >We have been talking about 17s and 24s as though the ETO was the only > >theatre > >in which they participated. It must be remembered that the 24 was very > >active > >in the Pacific Theatre. However, the old saying "there goes the crate our > >B17 > >came in" is still valid when thinking of the sleekness - or NON SUCH - of > >the > >B24. As for stats, I do not think it matters. When I got there they told > >me > >the rate of surviving 25 missions was 19%. When I commanded that squadron I > >told the Ground Exec to NEVER EVER tell such things to a new crew. > > > >Cheers! > > > >Bill Heller > > > >Kevin Pearson wrote: > > > > > Another skewing factor is that more B-24s were built than B-17s, > >something > > > like 12,700 B-17s, and 18,000+ B-24s when you add in the Navy variant, > >the > > > PB4Y-2s. I'm gonna have to leave this debate to someone more > >knowladgeable > > > than myself in the stats area. There are so many complicating factors, > >I'm > > > not sure all could accurately be taken into account. As Bill Heller has > > > said, we outproduced Germany and Japan in virtually all areas. And what > >a > > > tribute to the men and women on the homefront! > > > Kevin > > > > > > >From: Steve Hollifield > > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > >Subject: [303rd-Talk] B24s vs B17s > > > >Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 12:37:54 -0700 (PDT) > > > > > > > >With reference to the statistical debate, I have a > > > >question. If the loss rates for the entire war was > > > >similar between the B24s and B17s, couldn't that > > > >indicate that the B17s were in fact a more durable AC. > > > > I say this because the B17 debuted earlier in the war > > > >when bombing tactics and escorts were in their > > > >infancy. Once better fighters and better tactics were > > > >developed, it stands to reason that loss rates for > > > >both AC would become lower. If that is true, the B17s > > > >loss rates are skewed to the high side when compared > > > >to the B24s since the B17s on average operated in > > > >statistically more dangerous skies. > > > > > > > >Pewwe, stats stink!!!! But, they are interesting. > > > > > > > >Steve > > > > > > > > > > > >__________________________________________________ > > > >Do You Yahoo!? > > > >Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail > > > >http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Thu Jul 19 20:31:18 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 15:31:18 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying Message-ID: <14.17380c95.28888f86@aol.com> Kevin, We all used the cans the bomb fuses came in. If we used the relief tube the ball turret got ice on it.. The ball turret gunners didn't like that. I don't know what we would have done if we had women on the crews like they do now. Lost the war I guess. Best Wishes, Nameless Copilot From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Thu Jul 19 21:29:44 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Dick Smith) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 13:29:44 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying References: Message-ID: <000f01c11091$8cba3380$70f833cf@richards> Kevin: Something I forgot to tell you about the releif tube . One time I reached for it and the tube hardly reached the edge of the seat, you would have to be hung like a moose to use it. Apparently the tube had rotted and the mechanic just cut out the bad part to save himself work. He got punished because I let it go all over the cockpit and he had to clean that up ,especially after I talked to his C.O. Spider ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin Pearson" To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 11:38 AM Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > Spider: Thanks for the info. I'm a pilot and have been since I was 14, now > 44, but there is no way I could ever relieved myself in a funnel while > flying, let alone flying in formation. And the oxygen mask, couldn't even > imagine riding around with that strapped to my face after puking in it. I > am quite confident today's generation would not endur the hardships you > guys did if we ever had World War III. None of my friends have the > intestinal fortitude to do what you all did - pee in a relief tube and > breath from a mask you just lost your lunch in. Hell, my generation would > have turned back if there wasn't an inflight movie and a computer port in > the cockpit. What you guys did still facinates me. I'm also very much > impressed with the home front and how this country came together for the > first time - what they achieved and what you achieved will be discussed for > as long as mankind exists! And it is indeed a real honor to share in your > stories! > Kevin > > > >From: "Dick Smith" > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > >Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 11:15:57 -0700 > > > >Kevin: > > I took off the mask and dumped it out then it worked fine except for the > >smell which I'll never forget. > > We had a pilots releif tube under our seat which had a funnel on a tube > >which we were supposed to piss in. Pretty tough to do while flying > >formation .Lots of messy uniforms came home. > > I don't remember Tom Liston will look him up in the History which was > >written by Dick Atkins > > Spider > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Kevin Pearson" > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > >Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 7:09 AM > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > > > > > > > Hi Spider! Yep, that is the same reaction Dave Flint with the 44th > >BG(H) > > > had, only his chicken wasn't rotten. It was canned and I guess pretty > > > awful. Dave nevertouched chicken again either. > > > > > > So if you threw up in your oxygen mask, didn't that freeze and clog the > > > system? I know nothing about the operation of an oxygen mask, but I > >heard > > > they were prone to freezing up. > > > > > > Another question: I know how guys took a leak in the bombers, but what > >did > > > you fighter guys do when nature called? Did you have a bottle or > >something? > > > And if you did urinate in a bottle, I would think at altitude there > >would > > > be a lot of steam to fog your canopy? Is this so? > > > > > > I may have asked you this once before, but did you ever know a Tom > >Liston? > > > He transitioned from 17s to 51s and I believe he was in the Scouting > >Force, > > > too. He is the former owner of Bergners Department Stores which are > >popular > > > in Illinois. > > > Kevin > > > > > > > > > >From: "Dick Smith" > > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > > > >Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 15:48:38 -0700 > > > > > > > >Kevin: > > > > Scotch isn't Scotch if it's made in the USA.We got Bourbon and I gave > > > >mine > > > >to my Bombardier who really needed it. When I was flying 51's in the > > > >Scouting Force we got Chicken which the loaded frozen off the ships on > > > >Monday there being no Refrigeration in Blighty at that time when they > > > >served > > > >it on the following Sunday it was Rotten pull off a leg and it was > >green > > > >inside. We had 24 pilots and on Monday they couldn't find 8 pilots to > >fly > > > >who weren't sick. I upchucked chicken in my oxygen mask . Haven't eaten > > > >chicken since then. > > > > Spider > > > >----- Original Message ----- > > > >From: "Kevin Pearson" > > > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > > > >Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 9:13 AM > > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > > > > > > > > > > > > > Just out of curiosity, what was your favorite food served at your > >Bomb > > > > > Group, and what kinds of food did they have? I heard one story from > >a > > > >44th > > > > > BG pilot that early in the war they were serving canned chicken that > > > >came > > > >in > > > > > 55 gallon drums. He said the canned chicken gave guys a bad case of > >gas > > > >and > > > > > at altitude, the gas became excrutiatingly painful, that several > >ships > > > > > returned to base because of the many stomach aches. Any similar > > > >experiences > > > > > about how food affected you at altitude. > > > > > > > > > > And does anyone remember the brand name of the Scotch given > >following > >a > > > > > mission? Was it US or British made? > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at > >http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Thu Jul 19 23:30:04 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (David Y) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 15:30:04 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Relief Tube Message-ID: <000b01c110a2$5cc75c00$9491e0d8@h4k3401> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C11067.AF32C320 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable - - - Dick Smith - - - Back in the late fifties I was in the Navy Reserve at N.A.S. Los = Alamitos in So. Calif. I was in an anti-submarine helicopter squadron = and served as an air-crew member (Sonar operator) on an HSS-1. On = several occasions I needed to use the relief tube which depends on = forward airspeed to drain properly. Needless to say, at the speed which = a helicopter flies, sometimes the funnel would fill to overflowing and = then one would be left with a problem. I can imagine that in a combat situation one would just have to wet = thier pants. That probably happened often enough to you guys. When = you've got to go - - - -you've got to go. Best regards, - Dave Young ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C11067.AF32C320 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
- - - Dick Smith - - -
   Back in the late fifties I was in the Navy = Reserve=20 at N.A.S. Los Alamitos in So. Calif. I was in an anti-submarine = helicopter=20 squadron and served as an air-crew member (Sonar operator) on an HSS-1. = On=20 several occasions I needed to use the relief tube which depends on = forward=20 airspeed to drain properly. Needless to say, at the speed which a = helicopter=20 flies, sometimes the funnel would fill to overflowing and then one would = be left=20 with a problem.
    I can imagine that in a combat situation one = would just=20 have to wet thier pants. That probably happened often enough to you = guys.=20 When you've got to go - - - -you've got to go.
Best regards, - Dave Young
------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C11067.AF32C320-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 20 00:31:28 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Steve Hollifield) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 16:31:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [303rd-Talk] Favorite Foods Message-ID: <20010719233128.1854.qmail@web4503.mail.yahoo.com> A story my dad told me about base food was that if you were scheduled for a mission you could have real eggs and other "nutritious" breakfast foods instead of powdered eggs and other instant foods. Before his first mission he loaded up on real eggs, bacon, and the like. He's always loved breakfast. Anyway, as the plane reached bombing altitude the greases, gasses, and other side effects of such a meal began to create a very uncomfortable condition for his "GI" tract. He considered relief in an ammo box, "but" he couldn't bear the subzero temps. Well lets just say that first mission was a messy one!!! Upon landing he had to swallow his pride and ask the captain if he could "skip interrogation", then explain the reason. To make a long story short, from there on he ate the powdered eggs before missions and suffered no ill effects. Boy, he would kill me for passing this on!!! Nay, not really. Anyone else remember making any "rookie" mistakes like this one???? Best regards, Steve Hollifield __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 20 02:57:33 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 21:57:33 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Check out "Lady Be Good" B-24 Bomber, Quartermaster Graves Registration Searc Message-ID: <9c.10f6ce42.2888ea0d@aol.com> --part1_9c.10f6ce42.2888ea0d_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Click here: "Lady Be Good" B-24 Bomber, Quartermaster Graves Registration Search and Recovery --part1_9c.10f6ce42.2888ea0d_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Click here: "Lady Be Good" B-24 Bomber, Quartermaster Graves Registration
Search and Recovery --part1_9c.10f6ce42.2888ea0d_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 20 03:00:31 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 22:00:31 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Check out Lady Be Good Message-ID: <44.107d162b.2888eabf@aol.com> --part1_44.107d162b.2888eabf_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Click here: Lady Be Good --part1_44.107d162b.2888eabf_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Click here: Lady Be Good --part1_44.107d162b.2888eabf_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 20 08:37:01 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 03:37:01 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] RE: B17 vs B24 Message-ID: --part1_db.178fa845.2889399d_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I read with great interest the input from Ford Lauer. The original justification for what became the B17 was coastal defense. The Navy was considered to be supreme in the area of long range coastal defense until the late 1930s. In 1938 an obscure aviator in the Army Air Corps was assigned the navigational task of locating and intercepting the Italian liner Rex some 700 miles off the East coast of the US by COL Olds. The Italian liner was successfully located. The obscure aviator was LT Curtis LeMay. The aircraft which would evolve into the B17 was known as Model 299 within the Boeing Company. Model 299 was flown to Wright-Patterson with other submittals in competition for a multi-engine bomber contract with the Army. Boeing was the only contractor to provide a four engine proposal. All other designs had either two or three engines. Unfortunately, the Boeing submittal crashed on takeoff due to a failure to release control locks. The results of this error may be seen at the Air Force Museum web site www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/research/bombers/b2-13a.htm As a result of this crash, the multi-engine bomber contract was awarded by default to Douglas for the production of the B18. It should be noted that the B18 never saw combat in WWII. Fortunately, those who believed in the superior design of the Model 299 prevailed. Orders for the B17 trickled into Boeing during the final years of the Depression. The rest is a story of a remarkable aircraft. What is interesting is that an aircraft originally intended for coastal defense was employed for an entirely different purpose during a great world war. Best Wishes, John A. Jenkins 6910 Old Redmond Road Redmond, WA 98052 USA Phone (425) 885-0595 --part1_db.178fa845.2889399d_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit      I read with great interest the input from Ford Lauer.  The original
justification for what became the B17 was coastal defense.  The Navy was
considered to be supreme in the area of long range coastal defense until the
late 1930s.  In 1938 an obscure aviator in the Army Air Corps was assigned
the navigational task of locating and intercepting the Italian liner Rex some
700 miles off the East coast of the US by COL Olds.  The Italian liner was
successfully located.  The obscure aviator was LT Curtis LeMay.

      The aircraft which would evolve into the B17 was known as Model 299
within the Boeing Company.  Model 299 was flown to Wright-Patterson with
other submittals in competition for a multi-engine bomber contract with the
Army.  Boeing was the only contractor to provide a four engine proposal.  All
other designs had either two or three engines.  Unfortunately, the Boeing
submittal crashed on takeoff due to a failure to release control locks.  The
results of this error may be seen at the Air Force Museum web site

  www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/research/bombers/b2-13a.htm

As a result of this crash, the multi-engine bomber contract was awarded by
default to Douglas for the production of the B18.  It should be noted that
the B18 never saw combat in WWII.  Fortunately, those who believed in the
superior design of the Model 299 prevailed.  Orders for the B17 trickled into
Boeing during the final years of the Depression.  The rest is a story of a
remarkable aircraft.

      What is interesting is that an aircraft originally intended for
coastal defense was employed for an entirely different purpose during a great
world war.

Best Wishes,            

John A. Jenkins

6910 Old Redmond Road
Redmond, WA   98052   USA

Phone (425) 885-0595 --part1_db.178fa845.2889399d_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 20 18:05:31 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Chuck Golden) Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 10:05:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [303rd-Talk] The tubes. Message-ID: <20010720170531.21781.qmail@web13804.mail.yahoo.com> I read the latest give and take vis the bombers' means of releaving internal hydraulic pressure, and it reminded me of one of the funnest aircraft stories I've ever heard. It comes from my wife's cousin who was a B-25 pilot in the PTO - and if there are ladies present then I ask for forgiveness up front. Pancho told me the story of when he was in -25 upgrade training and the topic of the day was the pee tubes. Of course, they were nothing but a rubber hose with a funnel on the business end. One of the cadets asked the instructor how the airplane ferrying ladies (WAC) deal with this situation when they are confronted with "the need". Not having a ready answer, the intructor clammed up and there was a brief moment of embarrased silence in the class. That was until one of the wise-n-hiemers in the back piped up and said "I guess it's sort of like playing the trombone!" Class might as well have been dismissed for that day because everybody was doubled over in laughter and remained so for several hours. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 20 18:11:40 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (William Heller) Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 10:11:40 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] RE: B17 vs B24 References: Message-ID: <3B58664B.D289AF95@attglobal.net> --------------765D27C0AAA8D184EA1F1A35 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit John Jenkins ... Did you perhaps mean the B19, the Douglas bomber which sunk through the tarmac when brought out of the hangar ... from this was learned to use larger tread width for heavy bomber wheels. And was not that test pilot, Col. Umstead, who later was Base Commander at Smyrna, Tenn ... ? Cheers! Bill Heller JJENKINSR@cs.com wrote: > I read with great interest the input from Ford Lauer. The > original > justification for what became the B17 was coastal defense. The Navy > was > considered to be supreme in the area of long range coastal defense > until the > late 1930s. In 1938 an obscure aviator in the Army Air Corps was > assigned > the navigational task of locating and intercepting the Italian liner > Rex some > 700 miles off the East coast of the US by COL Olds. The Italian liner > was > successfully located. The obscure aviator was LT Curtis LeMay. > > The aircraft which would evolve into the B17 was known as Model > 299 > within the Boeing Company. Model 299 was flown to Wright-Patterson > with > other submittals in competition for a multi-engine bomber contract > with the > Army. Boeing was the only contractor to provide a four engine > proposal. All > other designs had either two or three engines. Unfortunately, the > Boeing > submittal crashed on takeoff due to a failure to release control > locks. The > results of this error may be seen at the Air Force Museum web site > > www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/research/bombers/b2-13a.htm > > As a result of this crash, the multi-engine bomber contract was > awarded by > default to Douglas for the production of the B18. It should be noted > that > the B18 never saw combat in WWII. Fortunately, those who believed in > the > superior design of the Model 299 prevailed. Orders for the B17 > trickled into > Boeing during the final years of the Depression. The rest is a story > of a > remarkable aircraft. > > What is interesting is that an aircraft originally intended for > coastal defense was employed for an entirely different purpose during > a great > world war. > > Best Wishes, > > John A. Jenkins > > 6910 Old Redmond Road > Redmond, WA 98052 USA > > Phone (425) 885-0595 --------------765D27C0AAA8D184EA1F1A35 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit John Jenkins ...

Did you perhaps mean the B19, the Douglas bomber which sunk through the tarmac when brought out of the hangar ... from this was learned to use larger tread width for heavy bomber wheels. And was not that test pilot, Col. Umstead, who later was Base Commander at Smyrna, Tenn ... ?

Cheers!

Bill Heller

JJENKINSR@cs.com wrote:

      I read with great interest the input from Ford Lauer.  The original
justification for what became the B17 was coastal defense.  The Navy was
considered to be supreme in the area of long range coastal defense until the
late 1930s.  In 1938 an obscure aviator in the Army Air Corps was assigned
the navigational task of locating and intercepting the Italian liner Rex some
700 miles off the East coast of the US by COL Olds.  The Italian liner was
successfully located.  The obscure aviator was LT Curtis LeMay.

      The aircraft which would evolve into the B17 was known as Model 299
within the Boeing Company.  Model 299 was flown to Wright-Patterson with
other submittals in competition for a multi-engine bomber contract with the
Army.  Boeing was the only contractor to provide a four engine proposal.  All
other designs had either two or three engines.  Unfortunately, the Boeing
submittal crashed on takeoff due to a failure to release control locks.  The
results of this error may be seen at the Air Force Museum web site

  www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/research/bombers/b2-13a.htm

As a result of this crash, the multi-engine bomber contract was awarded by
default to Douglas for the production of the B18.  It should be noted that
the B18 never saw combat in WWII.  Fortunately, those who believed in the
superior design of the Model 299 prevailed.  Orders for the B17 trickled into
Boeing during the final years of the Depression.  The rest is a story of a
remarkable aircraft.

      What is interesting is that an aircraft originally intended for
coastal defense was employed for an entirely different purpose during a great
world war.

Best Wishes,

John A. Jenkins

6910 Old Redmond Road
Redmond, WA   98052   USA

Phone (425) 885-0595

--------------765D27C0AAA8D184EA1F1A35-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 20 20:59:43 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Maurice Paulk) Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 14:59:43 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Lady Be Good Message-ID: <002601c11156$859245a0$0abb9ace@mjpmtman> Thanks for the info that was a very good "show". Since my direction finder was inoperative while stationed at Benghazi air field i don't know which direction from the town it was located. I was stationed ther during the months of July and Aug. of 1945. In later years I heard that that was the home field of The LADY. We had nice stone barracks to call "home"!! MAURICE PAULK From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 20 23:15:26 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 18:15:26 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] (no subject) Message-ID: <99.17efbf65.288a077e@aol.com> --part1_99.17efbf65.288a077e_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi To All: Here in Brooklyn five men were given an envelope which stated why they failed the physicals. They have 30 days to see a Dr. and have it corrected. Don't know who will pay for this, or what will happen if it cannot be corrected. They were fail because of eyesight, sugar in urine and blood pressure. There may be more reasons but each envelope is sealed and we have to wait until everybody open their envelope. Our low life site supervisor stated there are more coming. Hang in there. Bill Keane Local 119 --part1_99.17efbf65.288a077e_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi To All:
  Here in Brooklyn five men were given an envelope which stated why they
failed the physicals.  They have 30 days to see a Dr. and have it corrected.  
Don't know who will pay for this, or what will happen if it cannot be
corrected.  They were fail because
of eyesight, sugar in urine and blood pressure.  There may be more reasons
but each
envelope is sealed and we have to wait until everybody open their envelope.  
Our low life site supervisor stated there are more coming.  Hang in there.
                                                                             
Bill Keane
                                                                             
Local 119 --part1_99.17efbf65.288a077e_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sat Jul 21 00:32:14 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Ed Lamme) Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 16:32:14 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Douglas B-18 Message-ID: <002201c11174$38572bc0$66d04dd1@computer> William Heller & John Jenkins Reference exchanges about B18. There was an aircraft designated B-18 which was built by Douglas. It was a twin engine and very ungainly looking. I flew in it from Sebring AAB in August & September l942 on sub patrol. It had a nickname of "pregnant duck" because of the lower part of the fuselage protruding. As I recall, it was very slow but I do not remember the statistics as I was a new bombardier and it was my first assignment. I also flew a few patrols on an old Martin B-10. There were a some B-17 A's on the base and I flew two or three times in them At that time one had to be a Capt or above to fly the B-17. After my combat tour I was assigned to Smyrna AAB when Col Olmstead was CO and was instructing new pilots in B-24 transition in use of the C-1 autopilot and also cruise control. from April 44 to Aug 45 Ed Lamme From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sat Jul 21 00:35:13 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 19:35:13 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] (no subject) Message-ID: <12e.1b116fe.288a1a31@aol.com> --part1_12e.1b116fe.288a1a31_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi guys: I am sorry I sent this to the wrong list. This should had gone to a list dealing with the federal courts. Sorry again, guys. I will try to read my address book before sending again. Brooklyn Bill --part1_12e.1b116fe.288a1a31_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi guys:
  I am sorry I sent this to the wrong list.  This should had gone to a list
dealing with the federal courts.  Sorry again, guys.  I will try to read my
address book before sending again.
                                           Brooklyn Bill --part1_12e.1b116fe.288a1a31_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sat Jul 21 03:57:42 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 22:57:42 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] RE: B17 vs B24 Message-ID: <90.176cc69a.288a49a6@cs.com> --part1_90.176cc69a.288a49a6_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bill Heller, The limited sources I have available concerning this topic indicate that the Douglas B18 was chosen by default after the crash of the Boeing Model 299. The introduction of the B18 led to the phasing out of the Martin B10. Sadly, the B18 was not suited to combat. Slow and lumbering, the B18 was an easy target for fighters. During WWII the B18 was assigned to training duties and submarine patrols. I have tried to locate more information concerning the B18 at the Air Force Museum web site, but that source appears to be temporarily unavailable. When I find more pertinent data I will let you know. Best Wishes, John A. Jenkins 6910 Old Redmond Road Redmond, WA 98052 USA Phone (425) 885-0595 --part1_90.176cc69a.288a49a6_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bill Heller,

      The limited sources I have available concerning this topic indicate
that the Douglas B18 was chosen by default after the crash of the Boeing
Model 299.  The introduction of the B18 led to the phasing out of the Martin
B10.  Sadly, the B18 was not suited to combat.  Slow and lumbering, the B18
was an easy target for fighters.  During WWII the B18 was assigned to
training duties and submarine patrols.

      I have tried to locate more information concerning the B18 at the Air
Force Museum web site, but that source appears to be temporarily unavailable.
 When I find more pertinent data I will let you know.

Best Wishes,       

John A. Jenkins

6910 Old Redmond Road
Redmond, WA   98052   USA

Phone (425) 885-0595 --part1_90.176cc69a.288a49a6_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sat Jul 21 04:32:17 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 23:32:17 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] RE: B17 vs B24 Message-ID: <20.198b801c.288a51c1@aol.com> bill ,did you know a major tetiva who was flying b 18 sub patrol. i had him in gulfport ,miss. thanks. spec From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sat Jul 21 04:35:45 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 23:35:45 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Douglas B-18 Message-ID: <116.1f0b35f.288a5291@aol.com> ed ,did you know a major tetiva who flew some subpatrol in b18? spec From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sat Jul 21 04:37:34 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 23:37:34 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] RE: B17 vs B24 Message-ID: <5f.1825645c.288a52fe@aol.com> john did not some b18 get shot down by subs? spec From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sat Jul 21 07:34:59 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (William Heller) Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 23:34:59 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] RE: B17 vs B24 References: <90.176cc69a.288a49a6@cs.com> Message-ID: <3B592292.9F3880A1@attglobal.net> --------------0064F64D0CF4D62970709A17 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit John Jenkins ... Thank you. Cheers! Bill Heller JJENKINSR@cs.com wrote: > Bill Heller, > > The limited sources I have available concerning this topic > indicate > that the Douglas B18 was chosen by default after the crash of the > Boeing > Model 299. The introduction of the B18 led to the phasing out of the > Martin > B10. Sadly, the B18 was not suited to combat. Slow and lumbering, > the B18 > was an easy target for fighters. During WWII the B18 was assigned to > training duties and submarine patrols. > > I have tried to locate more information concerning the B18 at > the Air > Force Museum web site, but that source appears to be temporarily > unavailable. > When I find more pertinent data I will let you know. > > Best Wishes, > > John A. Jenkins > > 6910 Old Redmond Road > Redmond, WA 98052 USA > > Phone (425) 885-0595 --------------0064F64D0CF4D62970709A17 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit John Jenkins ...

Thank you.

Cheers!

Bill Heller

JJENKINSR@cs.com wrote:

Bill Heller,

      The limited sources I have available concerning this topic indicate
that the Douglas B18 was chosen by default after the crash of the Boeing
Model 299.  The introduction of the B18 led to the phasing out of the Martin
B10.  Sadly, the B18 was not suited to combat.  Slow and lumbering, the B18
was an easy target for fighters.  During WWII the B18 was assigned to
training duties and submarine patrols.

      I have tried to locate more information concerning the B18 at the Air
Force Museum web site, but that source appears to be temporarily unavailable.
 When I find more pertinent data I will let you know.

Best Wishes,

John A. Jenkins

6910 Old Redmond Road
Redmond, WA   98052   USA

Phone (425) 885-0595

--------------0064F64D0CF4D62970709A17-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sat Jul 21 14:00:55 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2001 09:00:55 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: B-18 Message-ID: <14.174c3345.288ad707@aol.com> --part1_14.174c3345.288ad707_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit If you any of you have ever seen the 1943 movie "Bombardier" with Randolph Scott, and Eddie Arnold, you will see a lot of B-18's. If you haven't you may want to rent it. Terry Lucas --part1_14.174c3345.288ad707_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit      If you any of you have ever seen the 1943 movie "Bombardier" with
Randolph Scott, and Eddie Arnold, you will see a lot of B-18's. If you
haven't you may want to rent it.
Terry Lucas --part1_14.174c3345.288ad707_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sat Jul 21 14:45:03 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2001 08:45:03 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: Kevin Pearson/ food-flying References: <20010720162041.7EAD353773@pairlist.net> Message-ID: <3B59875E.A05BF1F4@ix.netcom.com> I flew several years with CAF Texas Raiders B-17G. When going cross country with new crew and they had to take a leak we always told them to piss out the tail wheel well. We all got a big laugh when they came back wet cussing us. It always blew back up on them. Art Carpenter 303rd-talk-request@303rdBGA.com wrote: > Send 303rd-Talk mailing list submissions to > 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/303rd-talk > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > 303rd-talk-request@303rdBGA.com > > You can reach the person managing the list at > 303rd-talk-admin@303rdBGA.com > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of 303rd-Talk digest..." > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Army Air Corps Food/Flying (Dick Smith) > 2. Re: Army Air Corps Food/Flying (Kevin Pearson) > 3. Re: Army Air Corps Food/Flying (Dick Smith) > 4. Re: B24s vs B17s (William Heller) > 5. Re: Army Air Corps Food/Flying (Jprencher@aol.com) > 6. Re: Army Air Corps Food/Flying (Dick Smith) > 7. Relief Tube (David Y) > 8. Favorite Foods (Steve Hollifield) > 9. Check out "Lady Be Good" B-24 Bomber, Quartermaster Graves Registration Searc (Thor542086@aol.com) > 10. Check out Lady Be Good (Thor542086@aol.com) > 11. Re: RE: B17 vs B24 (JJENKINSR@cs.com) > > --__--__-- > > Message: 1 > From: "Dick Smith" > To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 11:15:57 -0700 > Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > Kevin: > I took off the mask and dumped it out then it worked fine except for the > smell which I'll never forget. > We had a pilots releif tube under our seat which had a funnel on a tube > which we were supposed to piss in. Pretty tough to do while flying > formation .Lots of messy uniforms came home. > I don't remember Tom Liston will look him up in the History which was > written by Dick Atkins > Spider > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Kevin Pearson" > To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 7:09 AM > Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > > > Hi Spider! Yep, that is the same reaction Dave Flint with the 44th BG(H) > > had, only his chicken wasn't rotten. It was canned and I guess pretty > > awful. Dave nevertouched chicken again either. > > > > So if you threw up in your oxygen mask, didn't that freeze and clog the > > system? I know nothing about the operation of an oxygen mask, but I heard > > they were prone to freezing up. > > > > Another question: I know how guys took a leak in the bombers, but what > did > > you fighter guys do when nature called? Did you have a bottle or > something? > > And if you did urinate in a bottle, I would think at altitude there > would > > be a lot of steam to fog your canopy? Is this so? > > > > I may have asked you this once before, but did you ever know a Tom Liston? > > He transitioned from 17s to 51s and I believe he was in the Scouting > Force, > > too. He is the former owner of Bergners Department Stores which are > popular > > in Illinois. > > Kevin > > > > > > >From: "Dick Smith" > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > > >Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 15:48:38 -0700 > > > > > >Kevin: > > > Scotch isn't Scotch if it's made in the USA.We got Bourbon and I gave > > >mine > > >to my Bombardier who really needed it. When I was flying 51's in the > > >Scouting Force we got Chicken which the loaded frozen off the ships on > > >Monday there being no Refrigeration in Blighty at that time when they > > >served > > >it on the following Sunday it was Rotten pull off a leg and it was green > > >inside. We had 24 pilots and on Monday they couldn't find 8 pilots to fly > > >who weren't sick. I upchucked chicken in my oxygen mask . Haven't eaten > > >chicken since then. > > > Spider > > >----- Original Message ----- > > >From: "Kevin Pearson" > > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > > >Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 9:13 AM > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > > > > > > > > > > Just out of curiosity, what was your favorite food served at your Bomb > > > > Group, and what kinds of food did they have? I heard one story from a > > >44th > > > > BG pilot that early in the war they were serving canned chicken that > > >came > > >in > > > > 55 gallon drums. He said the canned chicken gave guys a bad case of > gas > > >and > > > > at altitude, the gas became excrutiatingly painful, that several ships > > > > returned to base because of the many stomach aches. Any similar > > >experiences > > > > about how food affected you at altitude. > > > > > > > > And does anyone remember the brand name of the Scotch given following > a > > > > mission? Was it US or British made? > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > > > --__--__-- > > Message: 2 > From: "Kevin Pearson" > To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 13:38:12 -0500 > Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > Spider: Thanks for the info. I'm a pilot and have been since I was 14, now > 44, but there is no way I could ever relieved myself in a funnel while > flying, let alone flying in formation. And the oxygen mask, couldn't even > imagine riding around with that strapped to my face after puking in it. I > am quite confident today's generation would not endur the hardships you > guys did if we ever had World War III. None of my friends have the > intestinal fortitude to do what you all did - pee in a relief tube and > breath from a mask you just lost your lunch in. Hell, my generation would > have turned back if there wasn't an inflight movie and a computer port in > the cockpit. What you guys did still facinates me. I'm also very much > impressed with the home front and how this country came together for the > first time - what they achieved and what you achieved will be discussed for > as long as mankind exists! And it is indeed a real honor to share in your > stories! > Kevin > > >From: "Dick Smith" > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > >Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 11:15:57 -0700 > > > >Kevin: > > I took off the mask and dumped it out then it worked fine except for the > >smell which I'll never forget. > > We had a pilots releif tube under our seat which had a funnel on a tube > >which we were supposed to piss in. Pretty tough to do while flying > >formation .Lots of messy uniforms came home. > > I don't remember Tom Liston will look him up in the History which was > >written by Dick Atkins > > Spider > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Kevin Pearson" > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > >Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 7:09 AM > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > > > > > > > Hi Spider! Yep, that is the same reaction Dave Flint with the 44th > >BG(H) > > > had, only his chicken wasn't rotten. It was canned and I guess pretty > > > awful. Dave nevertouched chicken again either. > > > > > > So if you threw up in your oxygen mask, didn't that freeze and clog the > > > system? I know nothing about the operation of an oxygen mask, but I > >heard > > > they were prone to freezing up. > > > > > > Another question: I know how guys took a leak in the bombers, but what > >did > > > you fighter guys do when nature called? Did you have a bottle or > >something? > > > And if you did urinate in a bottle, I would think at altitude there > >would > > > be a lot of steam to fog your canopy? Is this so? > > > > > > I may have asked you this once before, but did you ever know a Tom > >Liston? > > > He transitioned from 17s to 51s and I believe he was in the Scouting > >Force, > > > too. He is the former owner of Bergners Department Stores which are > >popular > > > in Illinois. > > > Kevin > > > > > > > > > >From: "Dick Smith" > > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > > > >Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 15:48:38 -0700 > > > > > > > >Kevin: > > > > Scotch isn't Scotch if it's made in the USA.We got Bourbon and I gave > > > >mine > > > >to my Bombardier who really needed it. When I was flying 51's in the > > > >Scouting Force we got Chicken which the loaded frozen off the ships on > > > >Monday there being no Refrigeration in Blighty at that time when they > > > >served > > > >it on the following Sunday it was Rotten pull off a leg and it was > >green > > > >inside. We had 24 pilots and on Monday they couldn't find 8 pilots to > >fly > > > >who weren't sick. I upchucked chicken in my oxygen mask . Haven't eaten > > > >chicken since then. > > > > Spider > > > >----- Original Message ----- > > > >From: "Kevin Pearson" > > > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > > > >Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 9:13 AM > > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > > > > > > > > > > > > > Just out of curiosity, what was your favorite food served at your > >Bomb > > > > > Group, and what kinds of food did they have? I heard one story from > >a > > > >44th > > > > > BG pilot that early in the war they were serving canned chicken that > > > >came > > > >in > > > > > 55 gallon drums. He said the canned chicken gave guys a bad case of > >gas > > > >and > > > > > at altitude, the gas became excrutiatingly painful, that several > >ships > > > > > returned to base because of the many stomach aches. Any similar > > > >experiences > > > > > about how food affected you at altitude. > > > > > > > > > > And does anyone remember the brand name of the Scotch given > >following > >a > > > > > mission? Was it US or British made? > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at > >http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > --__--__-- > > Message: 3 > From: "Dick Smith" > To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 11:43:58 -0700 > Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > Kevin : > I checked the book and don't find your friends name . Check with Dick Atkins > at dick8af@flesh.net > Spider > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Kevin Pearson" > To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 7:09 AM > Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > > > Hi Spider! Yep, that is the same reaction Dave Flint with the 44th BG(H) > > had, only his chicken wasn't rotten. It was canned and I guess pretty > > awful. Dave nevertouched chicken again either. > > > > So if you threw up in your oxygen mask, didn't that freeze and clog the > > system? I know nothing about the operation of an oxygen mask, but I heard > > they were prone to freezing up. > > > > Another question: I know how guys took a leak in the bombers, but what > did > > you fighter guys do when nature called? Did you have a bottle or > something? > > And if you did urinate in a bottle, I would think at altitude there > would > > be a lot of steam to fog your canopy? Is this so? > > > > I may have asked you this once before, but did you ever know a Tom Liston? > > He transitioned from 17s to 51s and I believe he was in the Scouting > Force, > > too. He is the former owner of Bergners Department Stores which are > popular > > in Illinois. > > Kevin > > > > > > >From: "Dick Smith" > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > > >Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 15:48:38 -0700 > > > > > >Kevin: > > > Scotch isn't Scotch if it's made in the USA.We got Bourbon and I gave > > >mine > > >to my Bombardier who really needed it. When I was flying 51's in the > > >Scouting Force we got Chicken which the loaded frozen off the ships on > > >Monday there being no Refrigeration in Blighty at that time when they > > >served > > >it on the following Sunday it was Rotten pull off a leg and it was green > > >inside. We had 24 pilots and on Monday they couldn't find 8 pilots to fly > > >who weren't sick. I upchucked chicken in my oxygen mask . Haven't eaten > > >chicken since then. > > > Spider > > >----- Original Message ----- > > >From: "Kevin Pearson" > > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > > >Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 9:13 AM > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > > > > > > > > > > Just out of curiosity, what was your favorite food served at your Bomb > > > > Group, and what kinds of food did they have? I heard one story from a > > >44th > > > > BG pilot that early in the war they were serving canned chicken that > > >came > > >in > > > > 55 gallon drums. He said the canned chicken gave guys a bad case of > gas > > >and > > > > at altitude, the gas became excrutiatingly painful, that several ships > > > > returned to base because of the many stomach aches. Any similar > > >experiences > > > > about how food affected you at altitude. > > > > > > > > And does anyone remember the brand name of the Scotch given following > a > > > > mission? Was it US or British made? > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > > > --__--__-- > > Message: 4 > Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 11:41:09 -0700 > From: William Heller > To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] B24s vs B17s > Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > Kevin Pearson ... > > Anent the 19% ... I never proved nor disproved the figures given us in a > "welcome" speech. However, when coming home to a 20-bed barracks with 12 empty > beds, it sometimes SEEMS true. I did know of the overall 30% figure, but > different Groups did suffer varied losses at different times. The 100th Bomb > Group comes to mind. > > Whether or not any crewmember just "resigned" himself to a fate... I cannot > know. I do know on certain missions, after seeing other friends being blow up, > on fire, or going down ... you often wondered just HOW yhou yourself would "get > it" in the vernacular. Were we all scared? YES. I can say to one and all, we > were all scared. BUT used various methods of pruning ourselves for what was to > come once we entered hostile territory. I, myself, used a facade ... I would > sort of jump up and down in my seat and mouth words such as, "Come on up you > Luftwaffe! We're waiting for you!" And things such as that. BUT ALL THE TIME I > WAS SCARED STIFF! But, it did, in a way, relieve my fears for the moment. And, > it made for a few jokes among my crew. > > Of course, when your squadron loses almost ALL of its airborne force on a given > mission, THEN the 19% seems plausible. As mentioned, when I became CO of that > squadron, I DID caution the Ground Exec against ever "welcoming" a new crew in > that manner. > > The duties of a Squadron Commander? First, he is first in command of the > squadron. As such, conducts staff meetings and generally learns about ALL > facets of the squadron effort. Mostly, he is in command of the flying echelon, > though in command of ALL! Also, he writes the sad letters to the families to > those lost in combat. In this endeavor, he would (at least I did) question > barracks mates as to likes and dislikes of the lost comrade ... this so that > some little ditty or story could be established in the letter to let the > families know how the lost person was liked and known among his combat > buddies. The reason for this is that you could not know ALL there was to know > about a certain lost crewmember, etc. Also, the squadron commander was > required by Army Regulations to be a rated (that is pilot) Officer. He HAD to > wear wings. Thus a Ground Exec who usually ran the ground operation, though > second in command of the squadron on the ground, would not take over in a > temporary loss of the CO. This was done by the Operations Office, who was also > rated (a pilot) and thus the Ops Officer was the TRUE second in command. Due > to age, most squadron commander's orders read .... By Direction of the > President, so-and-so is appointed Commanding Officer of such and such squadron. > This was done so that if there WAS another officer in the squadron who > outranked the new CO by date-of-rank, it would NOT matter. The new one WAS IN > COMMAND due to that insertion in the orders, of BY DIRECTION OF THE PRESIDENT. > This was usually reduced to the phrase "BY DP" ... > > The squadron commander ALSO flys the lead plane in Group, Wing, Division or Air > Force Strike Force leads. Such leads are shared at different times by > different squadrons. > > I hope this answers some of your queries. > > Cheers! > > Bill Heller > > Kevin Pearson wrote: > > > Bill: 19%!! That's incredible!! How did you deal with that news? Did you > > just resign yourself to the fact you wouldn't make it? And you were all > > volonteers. Did you ever think with odds like that that maybe being a > > ground pounder might not be that bad? 19%! I've read in 42 and 43 survival > > rates for the 8th as a whole was only 30%, but one in five odds of making it > > sure must have been depressing. > > > > Yes, the B-24 fought with distinction in all theaters, including the MTO and > > the PTO. In addition, it flew supplies into China and supported the Burma > > campaign, not to mention flying sub patrols here in the States later in the > > war. I think the only safe thing we can say about B-17 and B-24 losses is > > they were too high for each. > > > > 19%! I'm not sure how I would have dealt with that, Bill. I guess you > > gritted your teeth and did what you had to do hoping somehow you'd make it. > > > > And can you tell me a little more about the duties of a Squadron Commander? > > What were you days like? How did you relate to the other crews in your > > squadron? > > > > Thanks for all your comments, Bill! > > Kevin > > > > >From: William Heller > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] B24s vs B17s > > >Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 14:07:59 -0700 > > > > > >Kevin Pearson ... > > > > > >We have been talking about 17s and 24s as though the ETO was the only > > >theatre > > >in which they participated. It must be remembered that the 24 was very > > >active > > >in the Pacific Theatre. However, the old saying "there goes the crate our > > >B17 > > >came in" is still valid when thinking of the sleekness - or NON SUCH - of > > >the > > >B24. As for stats, I do not think it matters. When I got there they told > > >me > > >the rate of surviving 25 missions was 19%. When I commanded that squadron I > > >told the Ground Exec to NEVER EVER tell such things to a new crew. > > > > > >Cheers! > > > > > >Bill Heller > > > > > >Kevin Pearson wrote: > > > > > > > Another skewing factor is that more B-24s were built than B-17s, > > >something > > > > like 12,700 B-17s, and 18,000+ B-24s when you add in the Navy variant, > > >the > > > > PB4Y-2s. I'm gonna have to leave this debate to someone more > > >knowladgeable > > > > than myself in the stats area. There are so many complicating factors, > > >I'm > > > > not sure all could accurately be taken into account. As Bill Heller has > > > > said, we outproduced Germany and Japan in virtually all areas. And what > > >a > > > > tribute to the men and women on the homefront! > > > > Kevin > > > > > > > > >From: Steve Hollifield > > > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > > >Subject: [303rd-Talk] B24s vs B17s > > > > >Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 12:37:54 -0700 (PDT) > > > > > > > > > >With reference to the statistical debate, I have a > > > > >question. If the loss rates for the entire war was > > > > >similar between the B24s and B17s, couldn't that > > > > >indicate that the B17s were in fact a more durable AC. > > > > > I say this because the B17 debuted earlier in the war > > > > >when bombing tactics and escorts were in their > > > > >infancy. Once better fighters and better tactics were > > > > >developed, it stands to reason that loss rates for > > > > >both AC would become lower. If that is true, the B17s > > > > >loss rates are skewed to the high side when compared > > > > >to the B24s since the B17s on average operated in > > > > >statistically more dangerous skies. > > > > > > > > > >Pewwe, stats stink!!!! But, they are interesting. > > > > > > > > > >Steve > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >__________________________________________________ > > > > >Do You Yahoo!? > > > > >Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail > > > > >http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > --__--__-- > > Message: 5 > From: Jprencher@aol.com > Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 15:31:18 EDT > Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > To: 303rd-talk@303rdbga.com > Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > Kevin, We all used the cans the bomb fuses came in. If we used the relief > tube the ball turret got ice on it.. The ball turret gunners didn't like > that. I don't know what we would have done if we had women on the crews like > they do now. Lost the war I guess. > Best Wishes, > Nameless Copilot > > --__--__-- > > Message: 6 > From: "Dick Smith" > To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 13:29:44 -0700 > Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > Kevin: > Something I forgot to tell you about the releif tube . One time I reached > for it and the tube hardly reached the edge of the seat, you would have to > be hung like a moose to use it. Apparently the tube had rotted and the > mechanic just cut out the bad part to save himself work. He got punished > because I let it go all over the cockpit and he had to clean that up > ,especially after I talked to his C.O. > Spider > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Kevin Pearson" > To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 11:38 AM > Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > > > Spider: Thanks for the info. I'm a pilot and have been since I was 14, > now > > 44, but there is no way I could ever relieved myself in a funnel while > > flying, let alone flying in formation. And the oxygen mask, couldn't even > > imagine riding around with that strapped to my face after puking in it. I > > am quite confident today's generation would not endur the hardships you > > guys did if we ever had World War III. None of my friends have the > > intestinal fortitude to do what you all did - pee in a relief tube and > > breath from a mask you just lost your lunch in. Hell, my generation would > > have turned back if there wasn't an inflight movie and a computer port in > > the cockpit. What you guys did still facinates me. I'm also very much > > impressed with the home front and how this country came together for the > > first time - what they achieved and what you achieved will be discussed > for > > as long as mankind exists! And it is indeed a real honor to share in your > > stories! > > Kevin > > > > > > >From: "Dick Smith" > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > > >Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 11:15:57 -0700 > > > > > >Kevin: > > > I took off the mask and dumped it out then it worked fine except for > the > > >smell which I'll never forget. > > > We had a pilots releif tube under our seat which had a funnel on a tube > > >which we were supposed to piss in. Pretty tough to do while flying > > >formation .Lots of messy uniforms came home. > > > I don't remember Tom Liston will look him up in the History which was > > >written by Dick Atkins > > > Spider > > >----- Original Message ----- > > >From: "Kevin Pearson" > > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > > >Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 7:09 AM > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > > > > > > > > > > Hi Spider! Yep, that is the same reaction Dave Flint with the 44th > > >BG(H) > > > > had, only his chicken wasn't rotten. It was canned and I guess pretty > > > > awful. Dave nevertouched chicken again either. > > > > > > > > So if you threw up in your oxygen mask, didn't that freeze and clog > the > > > > system? I know nothing about the operation of an oxygen mask, but I > > >heard > > > > they were prone to freezing up. > > > > > > > > Another question: I know how guys took a leak in the bombers, but > what > > >did > > > > you fighter guys do when nature called? Did you have a bottle or > > >something? > > > > And if you did urinate in a bottle, I would think at altitude there > > >would > > > > be a lot of steam to fog your canopy? Is this so? > > > > > > > > I may have asked you this once before, but did you ever know a Tom > > >Liston? > > > > He transitioned from 17s to 51s and I believe he was in the Scouting > > >Force, > > > > too. He is the former owner of Bergners Department Stores which are > > >popular > > > > in Illinois. > > > > Kevin > > > > > > > > > > > > >From: "Dick Smith" > > > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > > > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > > > > >Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 15:48:38 -0700 > > > > > > > > > >Kevin: > > > > > Scotch isn't Scotch if it's made in the USA.We got Bourbon and I > gave > > > > >mine > > > > >to my Bombardier who really needed it. When I was flying 51's in the > > > > >Scouting Force we got Chicken which the loaded frozen off the ships > on > > > > >Monday there being no Refrigeration in Blighty at that time when they > > > > >served > > > > >it on the following Sunday it was Rotten pull off a leg and it was > > >green > > > > >inside. We had 24 pilots and on Monday they couldn't find 8 pilots to > > >fly > > > > >who weren't sick. I upchucked chicken in my oxygen mask . Haven't > eaten > > > > >chicken since then. > > > > > Spider > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > > > > >From: "Kevin Pearson" > > > > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > > > > >Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 9:13 AM > > > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Just out of curiosity, what was your favorite food served at your > > >Bomb > > > > > > Group, and what kinds of food did they have? I heard one story > from > > >a > > > > >44th > > > > > > BG pilot that early in the war they were serving canned chicken > that > > > > >came > > > > >in > > > > > > 55 gallon drums. He said the canned chicken gave guys a bad case > of > > >gas > > > > >and > > > > > > at altitude, the gas became excrutiatingly painful, that several > > >ships > > > > > > returned to base because of the many stomach aches. Any similar > > > > >experiences > > > > > > about how food affected you at altitude. > > > > > > > > > > > > And does anyone remember the brand name of the Scotch given > > >following > > >a > > > > > > mission? Was it US or British made? > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at > > >http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > > > --__--__-- > > Message: 7 > From: "David Y" > To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 15:30:04 -0700 > Subject: [303rd-Talk] Relief Tube > Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > This is a multi-part message in MIME format. > > ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C11067.AF32C320 > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="Windows-1252" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > - - - Dick Smith - - - > Back in the late fifties I was in the Navy Reserve at N.A.S. Los = > Alamitos in So. Calif. I was in an anti-submarine helicopter squadron = > and served as an air-crew member (Sonar operator) on an HSS-1. On = > several occasions I needed to use the relief tube which depends on = > forward airspeed to drain properly. Needless to say, at the speed which = > a helicopter flies, sometimes the funnel would fill to overflowing and = > then one would be left with a problem. > I can imagine that in a combat situation one would just have to wet = > thier pants. That probably happened often enough to you guys. When = > you've got to go - - - -you've got to go. > Best regards, - Dave Young > > ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C11067.AF32C320 > Content-Type: text/html; > charset="Windows-1252" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > > > charset=3Dwindows-1252"> href=3D"file://C:\Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft = > Shared\Stationery\"> > > > > >
- - - Dick Smith - - -
>
   Back in the late fifties I was in the Navy = > Reserve=20 > at N.A.S. Los Alamitos in So. Calif. I was in an anti-submarine = > helicopter=20 > squadron and served as an air-crew member (Sonar operator) on an HSS-1. = > On=20 > several occasions I needed to use the relief tube which depends on = > forward=20 > airspeed to drain properly. Needless to say, at the speed which a = > helicopter=20 > flies, sometimes the funnel would fill to overflowing and then one would = > be left=20 > with a problem.
>
    I can imagine that in a combat situation one = > would just=20 > have to wet thier pants. That probably happened often enough to you = > guys.=20 > When you've got to go - - - -you've got to go.
>
Best regards, - Dave Young
> > ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C11067.AF32C320-- > > --__--__-- > > Message: 8 > Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 16:31:28 -0700 (PDT) > From: Steve Hollifield > To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > Subject: [303rd-Talk] Favorite Foods > Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > A story my dad told me about base food was that if you > were scheduled for a mission you could have real eggs > and other "nutritious" breakfast foods instead of > powdered eggs and other instant foods. > > Before his first mission he loaded up on real eggs, > bacon, and the like. He's always loved breakfast. > Anyway, as the plane reached bombing altitude the > greases, gasses, and other side effects of such a meal > began to create a very uncomfortable condition for his > "GI" tract. He considered relief in an ammo box, > "but" he couldn't bear the subzero temps. Well lets > just say that first mission was a messy one!!! Upon > landing he had to swallow his pride and ask the > captain if he could "skip interrogation", then explain > the reason. To make a long story short, from there on > he ate the powdered eggs before missions and suffered > no ill effects. > > Boy, he would kill me for passing this on!!! Nay, not > really. > > Anyone else remember making any "rookie" mistakes like > this one???? > > Best regards, > Steve Hollifield > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail > http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > > --__--__-- > > Message: 9 > From: Thor542086@aol.com > Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 21:57:33 EDT > To: DTOOLEY@allstate.com > Cc: 303rd-talk@303rdbga.com > Subject: [303rd-Talk] Check out "Lady Be Good" B-24 Bomber, Quartermaster Graves Registration Searc > Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > --part1_9c.10f6ce42.2888ea0d_boundary > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Click here: "Lady Be Good" B-24 Bomber, Quartermaster Graves Registration > Search and Recovery > > --part1_9c.10f6ce42.2888ea0d_boundary > Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Click here: "Lady Be Good" B-24 Bomber, Quartermaster Graves Registration >
Search and Recovery > > --part1_9c.10f6ce42.2888ea0d_boundary-- > > --__--__-- > > Message: 10 > From: Thor542086@aol.com > Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 22:00:31 EDT > To: DTOOLEY@allstate.com > Cc: 303rd-talk@303rdbga.com > Subject: [303rd-Talk] Check out Lady Be Good > Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > --part1_44.107d162b.2888eabf_boundary > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Click here: Lady Be Good > > --part1_44.107d162b.2888eabf_boundary > Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Click here: Lady Be Good > > --part1_44.107d162b.2888eabf_boundary-- > > --__--__-- > > Message: 11 > From: JJENKINSR@cs.com > Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 03:37:01 EDT > Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] RE: B17 vs B24 > To: 303rd-talk@303rdbga.com > Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > --part1_db.178fa845.2889399d_boundary > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > I read with great interest the input from Ford Lauer. The original > justification for what became the B17 was coastal defense. The Navy was > considered to be supreme in the area of long range coastal defense until the > late 1930s. In 1938 an obscure aviator in the Army Air Corps was assigned > the navigational task of locating and intercepting the Italian liner Rex some > 700 miles off the East coast of the US by COL Olds. The Italian liner was > successfully located. The obscure aviator was LT Curtis LeMay. > > The aircraft which would evolve into the B17 was known as Model 299 > within the Boeing Company. Model 299 was flown to Wright-Patterson with > other submittals in competition for a multi-engine bomber contract with the > Army. Boeing was the only contractor to provide a four engine proposal. All > other designs had either two or three engines. Unfortunately, the Boeing > submittal crashed on takeoff due to a failure to release control locks. The > results of this error may be seen at the Air Force Museum web site > > www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/research/bombers/b2-13a.htm > > As a result of this crash, the multi-engine bomber contract was awarded by > default to Douglas for the production of the B18. It should be noted that > the B18 never saw combat in WWII. Fortunately, those who believed in the > superior design of the Model 299 prevailed. Orders for the B17 trickled into > Boeing during the final years of the Depression. The rest is a story of a > remarkable aircraft. > > What is interesting is that an aircraft originally intended for > coastal defense was employed for an entirely different purpose during a great > world war. > > Best Wishes, > > John A. Jenkins > > 6910 Old Redmond Road > Redmond, WA 98052 USA > > Phone (425) 885-0595 > > --part1_db.178fa845.2889399d_boundary > Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > >      I read with great interest the input from Ford Lauer.  The original >
justification for what became the B17 was coastal defense.  The Navy was >
considered to be supreme in the area of long range coastal defense until the >
late 1930s.  In 1938 an obscure aviator in the Army Air Corps was assigned >
the navigational task of locating and intercepting the Italian liner Rex some >
700 miles off the East coast of the US by COL Olds.  The Italian liner was >
successfully located.  The obscure aviator was LT Curtis LeMay. >
>
      The aircraft which would evolve into the B17 was known as Model 299 >
within the Boeing Company.  Model 299 was flown to Wright-Patterson with >
other submittals in competition for a multi-engine bomber contract with the >
Army.  Boeing was the only contractor to provide a four engine proposal.  All >
other designs had either two or three engines.  Unfortunately, the Boeing >
submittal crashed on takeoff due to a failure to release control locks.  The >
results of this error may be seen at the Air Force Museum web site >
>
  www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/research/bombers/b2-13a.htm >
>
As a result of this crash, the multi-engine bomber contract was awarded by >
default to Douglas for the production of the B18.  It should be noted that >
the B18 never saw combat in WWII.  Fortunately, those who believed in the >
superior design of the Model 299 prevailed.  Orders for the B17 trickled into >
Boeing during the final years of the Depression.  The rest is a story of a >
remarkable aircraft. >
>
      What is interesting is that an aircraft originally intended for >
coastal defense was employed for an entirely different purpose during a great >
world war. >
>
Best Wishes,             >
>
John A. Jenkins >
>
6910 Old Redmond Road >
Redmond, WA   98052   USA >
>
Phone (425) 885-0595 > > --part1_db.178fa845.2889399d_boundary-- > > --__--__-- > > _______________________________________________ > 303rd-Talk mailing list > 303rd-Talk@303rdBGA.com > http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/303rd-talk > > End of 303rd-Talk Digest From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sat Jul 21 15:12:19 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2001 10:12:19 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying Message-ID: --part1_e.fe3113e.288ae7c3_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Kevin, I'm not so sure that the stories about WWII, 8th AF, Pacific Theatre or any of the rest of it will live on after our generation is gone. I have had occasion to talk to high school and other youths. Many of them have very little knowledge of what occured before computers and TV. Bob Finley --part1_e.fe3113e.288ae7c3_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Kevin,  I'm not so sure that the stories about WWII, 8th AF, Pacific Theatre
or any of the rest of it will live on after our generation is gone.  I have
had occasion to talk to high school and other youths.  Many of them have very
little knowledge of what occured before computers and TV.                     
     Bob Finley --part1_e.fe3113e.288ae7c3_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sat Jul 21 15:24:32 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2001 10:24:32 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Favorite Foods Message-ID: <7c.18c46ceb.288aeaa0@aol.com> --part1_7c.18c46ceb.288aeaa0_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On the subject of relief, I'd like to add this little anecdote. Our pilot had the GI's on one long mission, Frankfurt I believe, and he chose to use his helmet which he placed on the escape hatch in the nose after use. Of course, the contents froze until our descent over England. Unfortunately, an unsuspecting crew chief opened the hatch before we could. I won't repeat his comments! Bob Finley --part1_7c.18c46ceb.288aeaa0_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On the subject of relief, I'd like to add this little anecdote.  Our pilot
had the GI's on one long mission, Frankfurt I believe, and he chose to use
his helmet which he placed on the escape hatch in the nose after use. Of
course, the contents froze until our descent over England.  Unfortunately, an
unsuspecting crew chief opened the hatch before we could. I won't repeat his
comments!  
                                                              Bob Finley --part1_7c.18c46ceb.288aeaa0_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sat Jul 21 17:44:15 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2001 12:44:15 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: Relief Message-ID: --part1_ca.183302f2.288b0b5f_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I used and empty chaf box after a mission to Ulm G. Put it in the bomb bay and dropped it on the nearest German city we flew over. The guys from the radio room on back were ready to throw me out until I dumped the box. Bob --part1_ca.183302f2.288b0b5f_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I used and empty chaf box after a mission to Ulm G. Put it in the bomb bay
and dropped it on the nearest German city we flew over.
The guys from the radio room on back were ready to throw me out until I
dumped the box.
Bob --part1_ca.183302f2.288b0b5f_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sat Jul 21 18:03:59 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Ed Lamme) Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2001 10:03:59 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Douglas B-18 References: <116.1f0b35f.288a5291@aol.com> Message-ID: <002301c11207$233a9f40$c12564d8@computer> ----- Original Message ----- From: To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 8:35 PM Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Douglas B-18 > ed ,did you know a major tetiva who flew some subpatrol in b18? spec > > Spec - the name strikes a chord but for the life of me cannot place him, Ed > From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sat Jul 21 18:33:12 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2001 13:33:12 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] RE: B17 vs B24 Message-ID: <3c.eb38094.288b16d8@cs.com> --part1_3c.eb38094.288b16d8_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Spec, The information that I have readily available is primarily about the B17. The B18 is mentioned only briefly. If I am able to find more information concerning the sub patrols conducted by the B18 I will pass it on. A bit of irony occurred to me. Now that McDonnell-Douglas has been absorbed by the Boeing Company, the Douglas B18 is now part of the legacy of Boeing. Best Wishes, John A. Jenkins 6910 Old Redmond Road Redmond, WA 98052 USA Phone (425) 885-0595 --part1_3c.eb38094.288b16d8_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Spec,

      The information that I have readily available is primarily about the
B17.  The B18 is mentioned only briefly.  If I am able to find more
information concerning the sub patrols conducted by the B18 I will pass it on.

      A bit of irony occurred to me.  Now that McDonnell-Douglas has been
absorbed by the Boeing Company, the Douglas B18 is now part of the legacy of
Boeing.

Best Wishes,

John A. Jenkins

6910 Old Redmond Road
Redmond, WA   98052   USA

Phone (425) 885-0595 --part1_3c.eb38094.288b16d8_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sat Jul 21 18:32:30 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (William Heller) Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2001 10:32:30 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: Relief References: Message-ID: <3B59BCAE.B398A242@attglobal.net> --------------AB6A347C6F7757379057A620 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Well, might as well put my two cents into the "piss call" gambit. I peed out the left cockpit window. Crack the window open a wee bit and then raise up in your seat and aim at the left mike button on the control wheel. Complete evacuation AND it froze immediately so no one nor anything in the rear of the plane was inundated therewith. Since I was German, some of my friends used to say I am just pissing on the old country. A fellow officer friend of mine learned of this and did it with a general in the right seat ... something happened, do not know what ... BUT the general got the most of it ..... Is that correct, Bill Eisenhart? Cheers! Bill Heller BOMDRPR303@aol.com wrote: > I used and empty chaf box after a mission to Ulm G. Put it in the bomb > bay > and dropped it on the nearest German city we flew over. > The guys from the radio room on back were ready to throw me out until > I > dumped the box. > Bob --------------AB6A347C6F7757379057A620 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Well, might as well put my two cents into the "piss call" gambit. I peed out the left cockpit window. Crack the window open a wee bit and then raise up in your seat and aim at the left mike button on the control wheel. Complete evacuation AND it froze immediately so no one nor anything  in the rear of the plane was inundated therewith.  Since I was German, some of my friends used to say I am just pissing on the old country.  A fellow officer friend of mine learned of this and did it with a general in the right seat ... something happened, do not know what ...  BUT the general got the most of it ..... Is that correct, Bill Eisenhart?

Cheers!

Bill Heller

BOMDRPR303@aol.com wrote:

I used and empty chaf box after a mission to Ulm G. Put it in the bomb bay
and dropped it on the nearest German city we flew over.
The guys from the radio room on back were ready to throw me out until I
dumped the box.
Bob
--------------AB6A347C6F7757379057A620-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sat Jul 21 19:13:58 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Jim Walling) Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2001 08:13:58 -1000 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying In-Reply-To: <14.17380c95.28888f86@aol.com> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20010721081358.00862d40@ilhawaii.net> Compared to the food we got at the Kingman Gunnery school, the food at the 303rd was like eating at the Ritz. Jim Walling From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sat Jul 21 19:43:33 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Dick Smith) Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2001 11:43:33 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Douglas B-18 References: <002201c11174$38572bc0$66d04dd1@computer> Message-ID: <003101c11215$0c4a65a0$44f833cf@richards> All you would have to do is look at a B18 and you would see that all Douglass did was to modify the DC2or 3 into a bomber it has the same Wing . Spider ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ed Lamme" To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 4:32 PM Subject: [303rd-Talk] Douglas B-18 > William Heller & John Jenkins > > Reference exchanges about B18. There was an aircraft designated B-18 which > was built by Douglas. It was a twin engine and very ungainly looking. I > flew in it from Sebring AAB in August & September l942 on sub patrol. It > had a nickname of "pregnant duck" because of the lower part of the fuselage > protruding. As I recall, it was very slow but I do not remember the > statistics as I was a new bombardier and it was my first assignment. I also > flew a few patrols on an old Martin B-10. There were a some B-17 A's on > the base and I flew two or three times in them At that time one had to be > a Capt or above to fly the > B-17. > After my combat tour I was assigned to Smyrna AAB when Col Olmstead was CO > and was instructing new pilots in B-24 transition in use of the C-1 > autopilot and also cruise control. > from April 44 to Aug 45 > > Ed Lamme > From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sat Jul 21 21:03:44 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Maurice Paulk) Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2001 15:03:44 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Fw: RICH TEXT [HTML] ---PLAIN TEXT. Message-ID: <000c01c11220$3f8ad0c0$4fbb9ace@mjpmtman> OOPS !!! - Sent this to the wrong address!!!!! ----- Original Message ----- From: Maurice Paulk To: 303rd-talk-request@303rdBGA.com Maybe I'm sticking my 2 cents worth where it's not wanted. BUT _ { I am using Outlook Express.]Before SENDING your letter click on FORMAT - near the bottom of the box, click on PLAIN TEXT. This will save all the gobblitty-gook [mini-format]. This procedure must be repeated each time as it resets automatically. If I am out of line LET ME KNOW {Just don't talk about me when I'm gone!" IF ANYTHING GETS ME INTO TROUBLE IT WILL BE MY MOUTH --OR MY KEYBOARD!!!!!!!! MAURICE PAULK EVERY ONE LIKES TO SEE ME ! SOME ON MY ARRIVAL ! MOST ON MY DEPARTURE!! From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sat Jul 21 20:53:15 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2001 15:53:15 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Douglas B-18 Message-ID: <92.17c140a2.288b37ab@aol.com> thanks for reply From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sun Jul 22 17:22:38 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Bill Owen) Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 11:22:38 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Fw: Pilot's Hell Message-ID: <002601c112ca$8733d7a0$463f22d1@billowen> Bill Heller, being a former airline pilot, I thought you might get a kick out of this. It was sent to me by a former airline hostess with American Airlines. Best wishes, Bill Owen Subject: Fw: Pilot's Hell> > > > > > Pilot in Hell.... Mac died at the controls of his plane and went to pilots' hell, where he found a hideous devil and three doors. The devil was busy escorting other pilots to various "hell rooms." "I'll be right back--don't go away," said the devil, and he vanished. Sneaking over to the first door, Mac peeked in and saw a cockpit where the pilot was condemned to forever run through pre-flight checks. He slammed that door and peeked into the second. There, alarms rang and red lights flashed while a pilot had to avoid one emergency after another. Unable to imagine a worse fate, Mac cautiously opened the third door. He was amazed to see many beautiful, scantily clad flight attendants answering to a captain's every whim. He quickly returned to his place seconds before the devil reappeared. "Okay, Mac," said the devil, "Which door will it be, number 1 or number 2?" "Um, I want door number 3," answered Mac. "Sorry," said the devil. "You can't have door number 3. That's flight attendants' hell. From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sun Jul 22 19:28:10 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Loyd Coleman) Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 12:28:10 -0600 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Relief tube References: <20010703221256.4D815535A6@pairlist.net> Message-ID: <000401c112dc$10876ba0$566dded8@default> There has been a lot of discussion on relief tube for nose section of the B-17. There is one thing that can happen and actually did happen if the inspection of the tube is not done regular. One case in point was the crew was given order to bail out,the members in the back exited ok, the nose crewmen could not get the escape hatch door open, it was frozen shut due to a broken relief tube that let the urine drain inside around this door. Without the ability and quick action of our Pilot this could have been disastrous. Loyd Coleman 30M TG From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sun Jul 22 19:26:23 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 14:26:23 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: Boeing Legacy Message-ID: <7f.17886a06.288c74cf@aol.com> --part1_7f.17886a06.288c74cf_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reference: A bit of irony occurred to me. Now that McDonnell-Douglas has been absorbed by the Boeing Company, the Douglas B18 is now part of the legacy of Boeing. Best Wishes, John A. Jenkins Mr. Jenkins remark about "...McDonnell Douglas has been absorbed by the Boeing Company..." hit a nerve in me. Not that Mr. Jenkins said anything wrong, he in fact did not. I have never worked for McDonnell Douglas, but have spent my entire working life in aircraft manufacturing. I was at the McDonnell Douglas (MacDac) facility at Long Beach in June. The place was absolutely dead. It saddened me to see the ghost town that was once a great aircraft company. Boeing's take over of MacDac was by all appearances done with vengeance and prejudice. Every sign on every hanger, every street sign, everything that said "McDonnell Douglas" was unceremoniously removed and replaced with "Boeing." The only sign left is the old one on the main hanger that lights up at night. It says "Fly DC Jets." I am told that the only reason it still stands is because the City of Long Beach told Boeing that the sign is a historical structure and "will remain in place." Boeing had it in for Douglas (and later McDonnell Douglas) ever since the 1930s when the famous DC-3 bettered the Boeing 247. Douglas remained the king of airline development for a long time. The DC-8 was every bit as good as the 707, the DC-9/MD-80 was and still is (arguably) far superior to the 727 and 737. Boeing made a huge gamble in developing the 747, which ended up a huge success. Douglas's DC-10 failed due more to "bad press" than to being actually unsafe. I do not consider that Boeing "won the war" against MacDac on the basis that Boeing planes were somehow superior. Rather, MacDac was vulnerable to take over from a financial and business position. The saddest part about that is MacDac did it to themselves. Boeing is not to blame, they merely took advantage of an opportunity. MacDac was a shell of its former self. MacDac no longer had any assets or anything else under its roof with physical substance. MacDac became nothing more than "an assembly house" for major components built elsewhere. This is called "outsourcing." Outsourcing looks great on paper. The bean counters determine that a supplier can build a given item for half the cost it takes to build it in house. Companies that outsource are completely at the mercy of their suppliers in regard to delivery schedule, and quality. Every dime saved initially, ends up being spent on warranty and defective product returns, and having to travel to baby-sit the suppliers. These suppliers will do whatever they can get away with, so they have to be baby-sat. The outsourced items end up costing more in the longrun. No company should ever allow itself to get into that position. What is scary is that outsourcing is typical these days, and all companies are doing it. Boeing is doing it also, and Airbus is nipping at Boeing's heels. Outsourcing works when everything falls in place, which never happens. These multi-million dollar a year CEOs better start using their brains. It may be only a matter of time before Boeing becomes the "Boeing Division of Airbus Industrie." I don't mean to appear to be bashing Boeing and defending MacDac, for I am not. Every time another old American aircraft company bites the dust, I am saddened. And lots of them are gone- Grumman, Martin, Vought, General Dynamics, Consolidated, Republic, Fairchild, and now McDonnell Douglas. Oh some may still exist on paper, others in hyphenated corporate names, and others may be in business stamping out beer cans, but as the great aircraft manufacturers they once were, they are gone...............................Ford J. Lauer III --part1_7f.17886a06.288c74cf_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reference:      A bit of irony occurred to me.  Now that McDonnell-Douglas
has been
absorbed by the Boeing Company, the Douglas B18 is now part of the legacy of
Boeing.

Best Wishes,
John A. Jenkins


Mr. Jenkins remark about "...McDonnell Douglas has been absorbed by the
Boeing Company..." hit a nerve in me. Not that Mr. Jenkins said anything
wrong, he in fact did not. I have never worked for McDonnell Douglas, but
have spent my entire working life in aircraft manufacturing. I was at the
McDonnell Douglas (MacDac) facility at Long Beach in June. The place was
absolutely dead. It saddened me to see the ghost town that was once a great
aircraft company. Boeing's take over of MacDac was by all appearances done
with vengeance and prejudice. Every sign on every hanger, every street sign,
everything that said "McDonnell Douglas" was unceremoniously removed and
replaced with "Boeing."  The only sign left is the old one on the main hanger
that lights up at night. It says "Fly DC Jets." I am told that the only
reason it still stands is because the City of Long Beach told Boeing that the
sign is a historical structure and "will remain in place." Boeing had it in
for Douglas (and later McDonnell Douglas) ever since the 1930s when the
famous DC-3 bettered the Boeing 247. Douglas remained the king of airline
development for a long time. The DC-8 was every bit as good as the 707, the
DC-9/MD-80 was and still is (arguably) far superior to the 727 and 737.
Boeing made a huge gamble in developing the 747, which ended up a huge
success. Douglas's DC-10 failed due more to "bad press" than to being
actually unsafe. I do not consider that Boeing "won the war" against MacDac
on the basis that Boeing planes were somehow superior. Rather, MacDac was
vulnerable to take over from a financial and business position. The saddest
part about that is MacDac did it to themselves. Boeing is not to blame, they
merely took advantage of an opportunity. MacDac was a shell of its former
self. MacDac no longer had any assets or anything else under its roof with
physical substance. MacDac became nothing more than "an assembly house" for
major components built elsewhere. This is called "outsourcing." Outsourcing
looks great on paper. The bean counters determine that a supplier can build a
given item for half the cost it takes to build it in house. Companies that
outsource are completely at the mercy of their suppliers in regard to
delivery schedule, and quality. Every dime saved initially, ends up being
spent on warranty and defective product returns, and having to travel to
baby-sit the suppliers. These suppliers will do whatever they can get away
with, so they have to be baby-sat.  The outsourced items end up costing more
in the longrun. No company should ever allow itself to get into that
position. What is scary is that outsourcing is typical these days, and all
companies are doing it. Boeing is doing it also, and Airbus is nipping at
Boeing's heels. Outsourcing works when everything falls in place, which never
happens. These multi-million dollar a year CEOs better start using their
brains. It may be only a matter of time before Boeing becomes the "Boeing
Division of Airbus Industrie." I don't mean to appear to be bashing Boeing
and defending MacDac, for I am not. Every time another old American aircraft
company bites the dust, I am saddened. And lots of them are gone- Grumman,
Martin, Vought, General Dynamics, Consolidated, Republic, Fairchild, and now
McDonnell Douglas. Oh some may still exist on paper, others in hyphenated
corporate names, and others may be in business stamping out beer cans, but as
the great aircraft manufacturers they once were, they are
gone...............................Ford J. Lauer III --part1_7f.17886a06.288c74cf_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sun Jul 22 20:26:22 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Fory Barton) Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 14:26:22 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] How to spell relief Message-ID: <001701c112e4$319cfd20$3abcf5cd@computer> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0014_01C112BA.47F5E980 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable At least twice I recall visitors , during an open house, walk through = the B-17 and use the relief tube in the bomb bay as an intercom = microphone. I never bothered to correct them. Fory ------=_NextPart_000_0014_01C112BA.47F5E980 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
At least twice I recall visitors , = during an=20 open house, walk through the B-17 and use the relief tube in the bomb = bay as an=20 intercom microphone.
I never bothered to correct = them.
 
Fory
------=_NextPart_000_0014_01C112BA.47F5E980-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sun Jul 22 21:52:24 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 15:52:24 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] B24s vs B17s Message-ID: To Bill Heller: I have family in town now and am taking a few days off. But as they are all at the mall today, I wanted to check from my favorite frineds. Bill, I have more questions about squadron ops, but must save them until my company leaves. I'll write more later. Thanks for your response!! I was at a squadron operations building at the 96th BG at Snetterton Heath and they have turned the damn thing into a habitat for bats!! At least it is a peaceful place now! One fast questions for you Bill. Could the center fuel tank on TWA 800 have explosed in your opinion? I'm not buying what the NTSB is selling. Too many people saw a missle arch up at that 747. Do you have any persoanl theories? Cheers! Kevin >From: William Heller >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] B24s vs B17s >Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 11:41:09 -0700 > >Kevin Pearson ... > >Anent the 19% ... I never proved nor disproved the figures given us in a >"welcome" speech. However, when coming home to a 20-bed barracks with 12 >empty >beds, it sometimes SEEMS true. I did know of the overall 30% figure, but >different Groups did suffer varied losses at different times. The 100th >Bomb >Group comes to mind. > >Whether or not any crewmember just "resigned" himself to a fate... I cannot >know. I do know on certain missions, after seeing other friends being blow >up, >on fire, or going down ... you often wondered just HOW yhou yourself would >"get >it" in the vernacular. Were we all scared? YES. I can say to one and all, >we >were all scared. BUT used various methods of pruning ourselves for what was >to >come once we entered hostile territory. I, myself, used a facade ... I >would >sort of jump up and down in my seat and mouth words such as, "Come on up >you >Luftwaffe! We're waiting for you!" And things such as that. BUT ALL THE >TIME I >WAS SCARED STIFF! But, it did, in a way, relieve my fears for the moment. >And, >it made for a few jokes among my crew. > >Of course, when your squadron loses almost ALL of its airborne force on a >given >mission, THEN the 19% seems plausible. As mentioned, when I became CO of >that >squadron, I DID caution the Ground Exec against ever "welcoming" a new crew >in >that manner. > >The duties of a Squadron Commander? First, he is first in command of the >squadron. As such, conducts staff meetings and generally learns about ALL >facets of the squadron effort. Mostly, he is in command of the flying >echelon, >though in command of ALL! Also, he writes the sad letters to the families >to >those lost in combat. In this endeavor, he would (at least I did) question >barracks mates as to likes and dislikes of the lost comrade ... this so >that >some little ditty or story could be established in the letter to let the >families know how the lost person was liked and known among his combat >buddies. The reason for this is that you could not know ALL there was to >know >about a certain lost crewmember, etc. Also, the squadron commander was >required by Army Regulations to be a rated (that is pilot) Officer. He HAD >to >wear wings. Thus a Ground Exec who usually ran the ground operation, though >second in command of the squadron on the ground, would not take over in a >temporary loss of the CO. This was done by the Operations Office, who was >also >rated (a pilot) and thus the Ops Officer was the TRUE second in command. >Due >to age, most squadron commander's orders read .... By Direction of the >President, so-and-so is appointed Commanding Officer of such and such >squadron. >This was done so that if there WAS another officer in the squadron who >outranked the new CO by date-of-rank, it would NOT matter. The new one WAS >IN >COMMAND due to that insertion in the orders, of BY DIRECTION OF THE >PRESIDENT. >This was usually reduced to the phrase "BY DP" ... > >The squadron commander ALSO flys the lead plane in Group, Wing, Division or >Air >Force Strike Force leads. Such leads are shared at different times by >different squadrons. > >I hope this answers some of your queries. > >Cheers! > >Bill Heller > >Kevin Pearson wrote: > > > Bill: 19%!! That's incredible!! How did you deal with that news? Did >you > > just resign yourself to the fact you wouldn't make it? And you were all > > volonteers. Did you ever think with odds like that that maybe being a > > ground pounder might not be that bad? 19%! I've read in 42 and 43 >survival > > rates for the 8th as a whole was only 30%, but one in five odds of >making it > > sure must have been depressing. > > > > Yes, the B-24 fought with distinction in all theaters, including the MTO >and > > the PTO. In addition, it flew supplies into China and supported the >Burma > > campaign, not to mention flying sub patrols here in the States later in >the > > war. I think the only safe thing we can say about B-17 and B-24 losses >is > > they were too high for each. > > > > 19%! I'm not sure how I would have dealt with that, Bill. I guess you > > gritted your teeth and did what you had to do hoping somehow you'd make >it. > > > > And can you tell me a little more about the duties of a Squadron >Commander? > > What were you days like? How did you relate to the other crews in your > > squadron? > > > > Thanks for all your comments, Bill! > > Kevin > > > > >From: William Heller > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] B24s vs B17s > > >Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 14:07:59 -0700 > > > > > >Kevin Pearson ... > > > > > >We have been talking about 17s and 24s as though the ETO was the only > > >theatre > > >in which they participated. It must be remembered that the 24 was very > > >active > > >in the Pacific Theatre. However, the old saying "there goes the crate >our > > >B17 > > >came in" is still valid when thinking of the sleekness - or NON SUCH - >of > > >the > > >B24. As for stats, I do not think it matters. When I got there they >told > > >me > > >the rate of surviving 25 missions was 19%. When I commanded that >squadron I > > >told the Ground Exec to NEVER EVER tell such things to a new crew. > > > > > >Cheers! > > > > > >Bill Heller > > > > > >Kevin Pearson wrote: > > > > > > > Another skewing factor is that more B-24s were built than B-17s, > > >something > > > > like 12,700 B-17s, and 18,000+ B-24s when you add in the Navy >variant, > > >the > > > > PB4Y-2s. I'm gonna have to leave this debate to someone more > > >knowladgeable > > > > than myself in the stats area. There are so many complicating >factors, > > >I'm > > > > not sure all could accurately be taken into account. As Bill Heller >has > > > > said, we outproduced Germany and Japan in virtually all areas. And >what > > >a > > > > tribute to the men and women on the homefront! > > > > Kevin > > > > > > > > >From: Steve Hollifield > > > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > > >Subject: [303rd-Talk] B24s vs B17s > > > > >Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 12:37:54 -0700 (PDT) > > > > > > > > > >With reference to the statistical debate, I have a > > > > >question. If the loss rates for the entire war was > > > > >similar between the B24s and B17s, couldn't that > > > > >indicate that the B17s were in fact a more durable AC. > > > > > I say this because the B17 debuted earlier in the war > > > > >when bombing tactics and escorts were in their > > > > >infancy. Once better fighters and better tactics were > > > > >developed, it stands to reason that loss rates for > > > > >both AC would become lower. If that is true, the B17s > > > > >loss rates are skewed to the high side when compared > > > > >to the B24s since the B17s on average operated in > > > > >statistically more dangerous skies. > > > > > > > > > >Pewwe, stats stink!!!! But, they are interesting. > > > > > > > > > >Steve > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >__________________________________________________ > > > > >Do You Yahoo!? > > > > >Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail > > > > >http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at >http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sun Jul 22 21:53:51 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 15:53:51 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying Message-ID: ThANKS Spider! Was there more than one scouting force? I have to get to the bottom of this. Kevin >From: "Dick Smith" >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying >Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 11:43:58 -0700 > >Kevin : >I checked the book and don't find your friends name . Check with Dick >Atkins >at dick8af@flesh.net > Spider >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Kevin Pearson" >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> >Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 7:09 AM >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > > > > Hi Spider! Yep, that is the same reaction Dave Flint with the 44th >BG(H) > > had, only his chicken wasn't rotten. It was canned and I guess pretty > > awful. Dave nevertouched chicken again either. > > > > So if you threw up in your oxygen mask, didn't that freeze and clog the > > system? I know nothing about the operation of an oxygen mask, but I >heard > > they were prone to freezing up. > > > > Another question: I know how guys took a leak in the bombers, but what >did > > you fighter guys do when nature called? Did you have a bottle or >something? > > And if you did urinate in a bottle, I would think at altitude there >would > > be a lot of steam to fog your canopy? Is this so? > > > > I may have asked you this once before, but did you ever know a Tom >Liston? > > He transitioned from 17s to 51s and I believe he was in the Scouting >Force, > > too. He is the former owner of Bergners Department Stores which are >popular > > in Illinois. > > Kevin > > > > > > >From: "Dick Smith" > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > > >Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 15:48:38 -0700 > > > > > >Kevin: > > > Scotch isn't Scotch if it's made in the USA.We got Bourbon and I gave > > >mine > > >to my Bombardier who really needed it. When I was flying 51's in the > > >Scouting Force we got Chicken which the loaded frozen off the ships on > > >Monday there being no Refrigeration in Blighty at that time when they > > >served > > >it on the following Sunday it was Rotten pull off a leg and it was >green > > >inside. We had 24 pilots and on Monday they couldn't find 8 pilots to >fly > > >who weren't sick. I upchucked chicken in my oxygen mask . Haven't eaten > > >chicken since then. > > > Spider > > >----- Original Message ----- > > >From: "Kevin Pearson" > > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > > >Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 9:13 AM > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > > > > > > > > > > Just out of curiosity, what was your favorite food served at your >Bomb > > > > Group, and what kinds of food did they have? I heard one story from >a > > >44th > > > > BG pilot that early in the war they were serving canned chicken that > > >came > > >in > > > > 55 gallon drums. He said the canned chicken gave guys a bad case of >gas > > >and > > > > at altitude, the gas became excrutiatingly painful, that several >ships > > > > returned to base because of the many stomach aches. Any similar > > >experiences > > > > about how food affected you at altitude. > > > > > > > > And does anyone remember the brand name of the Scotch given >following >a > > > > mission? Was it US or British made? > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at >http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > > > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sun Jul 22 22:00:58 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 16:00:58 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] The tubes. Message-ID: You guys are the BEST!!! Kevin >From: Chuck Golden >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >Subject: [303rd-Talk] The tubes. >Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 10:05:31 -0700 (PDT) > >I read the latest give and take vis the bombers' means >of releaving internal hydraulic pressure, and it >reminded me of one of the funnest aircraft stories >I've ever heard. It comes from my wife's cousin who >was a B-25 pilot in the PTO - and if there are ladies >present then I ask for forgiveness up front. > >Pancho told me the story of when he was in -25 upgrade >training and the topic of the day was the pee tubes. >Of course, they were nothing but a rubber hose with a >funnel on the business end. One of the cadets asked >the instructor how the airplane ferrying ladies (WAC) >deal with this situation when they are confronted with >"the need". Not having a ready answer, the intructor >clammed up and there was a brief moment of embarrased >silence in the class. That was until one of the >wise-n-hiemers in the back piped up and said "I guess >it's sort of like playing the trombone!" > >Class might as well have been dismissed for that day >because everybody was doubled over in laughter and >remained so for several hours. > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail >http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sun Jul 22 22:02:20 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 17:02:20 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: Boeing Legacy Message-ID: <4f.e97677c.288c995c@cs.com> --part1_4f.e97677c.288c995c_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The Boeing Company and McDonnell-Douglas have interrelated legacies. Boeing produced the B17 and B29 for wartime purposes. The B17 evolved from the ill-fated Boeing Model 247. Model 247 was not a resounding success because it was in direct competition with the superior Douglas DC2. The B29 would lead to the B50 and eventually the C97. The civilian version of the C97 was Boeing Model 377 or the Stratocruiser. The Stratocruiser was also not a commercial success. Douglas would retain the lion's share of commercial sales until the arrival of the Boeing 707. Boeing has maintained its dominance in the commercial market until very recently. It is indeed sad when an aircraft company must merge with another to survive. I have been continuously employed by the Boeing Company since the late 1970s. I have been involved with the 727, 737, 747, 757, E3A, and B2 Programs. When I joined Boeing the approximate breakdown of the commercial aircraft market was Boeing 65%, McDonnell-Douglas 30%, and Airbus 5%. Airbus has greatly increased its market penetration since then to around 50%, mostly at the expense of McDonnell-Douglas. What the future holds for commercial aviation is unknown. Boeing has a sub sonic aircraft under development, but I have not seen a great number of sales materialize for this plane yet. Airbus is planning an aircraft which is larger than the Boeing 747. When I first came to Boeing you belonged to a 'family'. Now everything is extremely cost oriented. Loyalty to people is pretty much a thing of the past. Competition from Airbus and the dwindling military budget have unfortunately caused this to happen. I have some knowledge of this because I work in the area of Cost Management. As I understand the current thinking of upper management, Boeing wants to get out of the business of producing small parts and subassemblies. Boeing management wants to concentrate on what is known as our 'core competency' which is aircraft assembly. Not all of us in the 'old' Boeing were thrilled with the idea of merging with McDonnell-Douglas. I still have misgivings about it. Some of the management that we inherited from McDonnell-Douglas should have gone elsewhere. Hopefully they will retire before they can do too much more damage. Best Wishes, John A. Jenkins 6910 Old Redmond Road Redmond, WA 98052 USA Phone (425) 885-0595 --part1_4f.e97677c.288c995c_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit      The Boeing Company and McDonnell-Douglas have interrelated legacies.  
Boeing produced the B17 and B29 for wartime purposes.  The B17 evolved from
the ill-fated Boeing Model 247.  Model 247 was not a resounding success
because it was in direct competition with the superior Douglas DC2.  The B29
would lead to the B50 and eventually the C97.  The civilian version of the
C97 was Boeing Model 377 or the Stratocruiser.  The Stratocruiser was also
not a commercial success.  Douglas would retain the lion's share of
commercial sales until the arrival of the Boeing 707.  Boeing has maintained
its dominance in the commercial market until very recently.  
      
      It is indeed sad when an aircraft company must merge with another to
survive.  I have been continuously employed by the Boeing Company since the
late 1970s.  I have been involved with the 727, 737, 747, 757, E3A, and B2
Programs.  When I joined Boeing the approximate breakdown of the commercial
aircraft market was Boeing 65%, McDonnell-Douglas 30%, and Airbus 5%.  Airbus
has greatly increased its market penetration since then to around 50%, mostly
at the expense of McDonnell-Douglas.  What the future holds for commercial
aviation is unknown.  Boeing has a sub sonic aircraft under development, but
I have not seen a great number of sales materialize for this plane yet.  
Airbus is planning an aircraft which is larger than the Boeing 747.

      When I first came to Boeing you belonged to a 'family'.  Now
everything is extremely cost oriented.  Loyalty to people is pretty much a
thing of the past.  Competition from Airbus and the dwindling military budget
have unfortunately caused this to happen.  I have some knowledge of this
because I work in the area of Cost Management.  As I understand the current
thinking of upper management, Boeing wants to get out of the business of
producing small parts and subassemblies.  Boeing management wants to
concentrate on what is known as our 'core competency' which is aircraft
assembly.

      Not all of us in the 'old' Boeing were thrilled with the idea of
merging with McDonnell-Douglas.  I still have misgivings about it.  Some of
the management that we inherited from McDonnell-Douglas should have gone
elsewhere.  Hopefully they will retire before they can do too much more
damage.  

Best Wishes,    
       
John A. Jenkins

6910 Old Redmond Road
Redmond, WA   98052   USA

Phone (425) 885-0595 --part1_4f.e97677c.288c995c_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sun Jul 22 22:03:27 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 16:03:27 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Moleworth Hangar and "The Bomb" Message-ID: Were any of you guys at Molesworth the night the RAF bombed you? If so, what do you remember? I have seen a few written stories. I have even seen the hole in the hangar and the dent it made in the floor! I did read one story Harry sent me about the guys in the tower who witnessed the event. I think the date was like 24 December 44, I hope that is right Harry. Kevin >From: William Heller >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] RE: B17 vs B24 >Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 10:11:40 -0700 > >John Jenkins ... > >Did you perhaps mean the B19, the Douglas bomber which sunk through the >tarmac when brought out of the hangar ... from this was learned to use >larger tread width for heavy bomber wheels. And was not that test pilot, >Col. Umstead, who later was Base Commander at Smyrna, Tenn ... ? > >Cheers! > >Bill Heller > >JJENKINSR@cs.com wrote: > > > I read with great interest the input from Ford Lauer. The > > original > > justification for what became the B17 was coastal defense. The Navy > > was > > considered to be supreme in the area of long range coastal defense > > until the > > late 1930s. In 1938 an obscure aviator in the Army Air Corps was > > assigned > > the navigational task of locating and intercepting the Italian liner > > Rex some > > 700 miles off the East coast of the US by COL Olds. The Italian liner > > was > > successfully located. The obscure aviator was LT Curtis LeMay. > > > > The aircraft which would evolve into the B17 was known as Model > > 299 > > within the Boeing Company. Model 299 was flown to Wright-Patterson > > with > > other submittals in competition for a multi-engine bomber contract > > with the > > Army. Boeing was the only contractor to provide a four engine > > proposal. All > > other designs had either two or three engines. Unfortunately, the > > Boeing > > submittal crashed on takeoff due to a failure to release control > > locks. The > > results of this error may be seen at the Air Force Museum web site > > > > www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/research/bombers/b2-13a.htm > > > > As a result of this crash, the multi-engine bomber contract was > > awarded by > > default to Douglas for the production of the B18. It should be noted > > that > > the B18 never saw combat in WWII. Fortunately, those who believed in > > the > > superior design of the Model 299 prevailed. Orders for the B17 > > trickled into > > Boeing during the final years of the Depression. The rest is a story > > of a > > remarkable aircraft. > > > > What is interesting is that an aircraft originally intended for > > coastal defense was employed for an entirely different purpose during > > a great > > world war. > > > > Best Wishes, > > > > John A. Jenkins > > > > 6910 Old Redmond Road > > Redmond, WA 98052 USA > > > > Phone (425) 885-0595 _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sun Jul 22 22:03:44 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (William Heller) Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 14:03:44 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: Boeing Legacy References: <7f.17886a06.288c74cf@aol.com> Message-ID: <3B5B3FB0.CAF37DB6@attglobal.net> --------------2EC8C0F39226F236150D57C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Fordlauer .... Well said. To those of us in the industry ... myself since 1936 ... it was "Boeing became famous BECAUSE of wars and Douglass became famous IN SPITE of wars." And never forget that one of the first B17s, on a test run , crashed DUE TO THE CONTROLS BEING LOCKED! That has to be the greatest sin of ANY pilot. It is so basic it is like Ian Woosan having more than 14 Clubs in his bag at the British Open ... Cheers! WCH Fordlauer@aol.com wrote: > Reference: A bit of irony occurred to me. Now that > McDonnell-Douglas > has been > absorbed by the Boeing Company, the Douglas B18 is now part of the > legacy of > Boeing. > > Best Wishes, > John A. Jenkins > > > Mr. Jenkins remark about "...McDonnell Douglas has been absorbed by > the > Boeing Company..." hit a nerve in me. Not that Mr. Jenkins said > anything > wrong, he in fact did not. I have never worked for McDonnell Douglas, > but > have spent my entire working life in aircraft manufacturing. I was at > the > McDonnell Douglas (MacDac) facility at Long Beach in June. The place > was > absolutely dead. It saddened me to see the ghost town that was once a > great > aircraft company. Boeing's take over of MacDac was by all appearances > done > with vengeance and prejudice. Every sign on every hanger, every street > sign, > everything that said "McDonnell Douglas" was unceremoniously removed > and > replaced with "Boeing." The only sign left is the old one on the main > hanger > that lights up at night. It says "Fly DC Jets." I am told that the > only > reason it still stands is because the City of Long Beach told Boeing > that the > sign is a historical structure and "will remain in place." Boeing had > it in > for Douglas (and later McDonnell Douglas) ever since the 1930s when > the > famous DC-3 bettered the Boeing 247. Douglas remained the king of > airline > development for a long time. The DC-8 was every bit as good as the > 707, the > DC-9/MD-80 was and still is (arguably) far superior to the 727 and > 737. > Boeing made a huge gamble in developing the 747, which ended up a huge > > success. Douglas's DC-10 failed due more to "bad press" than to being > actually unsafe. I do not consider that Boeing "won the war" against > MacDac > on the basis that Boeing planes were somehow superior. Rather, MacDac > was > vulnerable to take over from a financial and business position. The > saddest > part about that is MacDac did it to themselves. Boeing is not to > blame, they > merely took advantage of an opportunity. MacDac was a shell of its > former > self. MacDac no longer had any assets or anything else under its roof > with > physical substance. MacDac became nothing more than "an assembly > house" for > major components built elsewhere. This is called "outsourcing." > Outsourcing > looks great on paper. The bean counters determine that a supplier can > build a > given item for half the cost it takes to build it in house. Companies > that > outsource are completely at the mercy of their suppliers in regard to > delivery schedule, and quality. Every dime saved initially, ends up > being > spent on warranty and defective product returns, and having to travel > to > baby-sit the suppliers. These suppliers will do whatever they can get > away > with, so they have to be baby-sat. The outsourced items end up > costing more > in the longrun. No company should ever allow itself to get into that > position. What is scary is that outsourcing is typical these days, and > all > companies are doing it. Boeing is doing it also, and Airbus is nipping > at > Boeing's heels. Outsourcing works when everything falls in place, > which never > happens. These multi-million dollar a year CEOs better start using > their > brains. It may be only a matter of time before Boeing becomes the > "Boeing > Division of Airbus Industrie." I don't mean to appear to be bashing > Boeing > and defending MacDac, for I am not. Every time another old American > aircraft > company bites the dust, I am saddened. And lots of them are gone- > Grumman, > Martin, Vought, General Dynamics, Consolidated, Republic, Fairchild, > and now > McDonnell Douglas. Oh some may still exist on paper, others in > hyphenated > corporate names, and others may be in business stamping out beer cans, > but as > the great aircraft manufacturers they once were, they are > gone...............................Ford J. Lauer III --------------2EC8C0F39226F236150D57C0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Fordlauer ....

Well said. To those of us in the industry ... myself since 1936 ... it was "Boeing became famous BECAUSE of wars and Douglass became famous IN SPITE of wars."  And never forget that one of the first B17s, on a test run , crashed DUE TO THE CONTROLS BEING LOCKED!  That has to be the greatest sin of ANY pilot.  It is so basic it is like Ian Woosan having more than 14 Clubs in his bag at the British Open ...

Cheers!

WCH

Fordlauer@aol.com wrote:

Reference:      A bit of irony occurred to me.  Now that McDonnell-Douglas
has been
absorbed by the Boeing Company, the Douglas B18 is now part of the legacy of
Boeing.

Best Wishes,
John A. Jenkins
 

Mr. Jenkins remark about "...McDonnell Douglas has been absorbed by the
Boeing Company..." hit a nerve in me. Not that Mr. Jenkins said anything
wrong, he in fact did not. I have never worked for McDonnell Douglas, but
have spent my entire working life in aircraft manufacturing. I was at the
McDonnell Douglas (MacDac) facility at Long Beach in June. The place was
absolutely dead. It saddened me to see the ghost town that was once a great
aircraft company. Boeing's take over of MacDac was by all appearances done
with vengeance and prejudice. Every sign on every hanger, every street sign,
everything that said "McDonnell Douglas" was unceremoniously removed and
replaced with "Boeing."  The only sign left is the old one on the main hanger
that lights up at night. It says "Fly DC Jets." I am told that the only
reason it still stands is because the City of Long Beach told Boeing that the
sign is a historical structure and "will remain in place." Boeing had it in
for Douglas (and later McDonnell Douglas) ever since the 1930s when the
famous DC-3 bettered the Boeing 247. Douglas remained the king of airline
development for a long time. The DC-8 was every bit as good as the 707, the
DC-9/MD-80 was and still is (arguably) far superior to the 727 and 737.
Boeing made a huge gamble in developing the 747, which ended up a huge
success. Douglas's DC-10 failed due more to "bad press" than to being
actually unsafe. I do not consider that Boeing "won the war" against MacDac
on the basis that Boeing planes were somehow superior. Rather, MacDac was
vulnerable to take over from a financial and business position. The saddest
part about that is MacDac did it to themselves. Boeing is not to blame, they
merely took advantage of an opportunity. MacDac was a shell of its former
self. MacDac no longer had any assets or anything else under its roof with
physical substance. MacDac became nothing more than "an assembly house" for
major components built elsewhere. This is called "outsourcing." Outsourcing
looks great on paper. The bean counters determine that a supplier can build a
given item for half the cost it takes to build it in house. Companies that
outsource are completely at the mercy of their suppliers in regard to
delivery schedule, and quality. Every dime saved initially, ends up being
spent on warranty and defective product returns, and having to travel to
baby-sit the suppliers. These suppliers will do whatever they can get away
with, so they have to be baby-sat.  The outsourced items end up costing more
in the longrun. No company should ever allow itself to get into that
position. What is scary is that outsourcing is typical these days, and all
companies are doing it. Boeing is doing it also, and Airbus is nipping at
Boeing's heels. Outsourcing works when everything falls in place, which never
happens. These multi-million dollar a year CEOs better start using their
brains. It may be only a matter of time before Boeing becomes the "Boeing
Division of Airbus Industrie." I don't mean to appear to be bashing Boeing
and defending MacDac, for I am not. Every time another old American aircraft
company bites the dust, I am saddened. And lots of them are gone- Grumman,
Martin, Vought, General Dynamics, Consolidated, Republic, Fairchild, and now
McDonnell Douglas. Oh some may still exist on paper, others in hyphenated
corporate names, and others may be in business stamping out beer cans, but as
the great aircraft manufacturers they once were, they are
gone...............................Ford J. Lauer III

--------------2EC8C0F39226F236150D57C0-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sun Jul 22 22:52:20 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Maurice Paulk) Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 16:52:20 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] FOOD ---303RD Message-ID: <000d01c112f8$962b6420$40bb9ace@mjpmtman> Never really had any complaints about the food - especially after hearing what the RAF was served --quite skimpy compared to ours.. The only thing that really got to me was the green beans or brussell sprouts. Served from a 20 gal bowler, you had to pull the vegetable throiugh about 8 " of bacon grease. Even the stews were good but after my first flight I learned not to eat stew before flying. I had toast and coffee before the Continental Express flight. We had a pastry cook that was out of this world--after about two weeks he was sent to the Officers mess. Rumor had it that he was a crewchief on the line and the crew chief was in the kitchen. After we arrived in Oct, 8 1942 we were on British rations for six months.Spam [pork luncheon loaf] fried for breakfast, mutton stew for dinner [you coiuld smell the mess hall for a mile} and cold cuts for supper [more pork luncheon loaf.] The bread although coarse was very good.----Mauice Paulk From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sun Jul 22 22:29:27 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 17:29:27 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: Boeing Legacy Message-ID: <82.d6a3ecf.288c9fb7@cs.com> --part1_82.d6a3ecf.288c9fb7_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bill Heller FYI - Two Army pilots were at the controls of the Boeing Model 299 when it crashed at Wright Field on October 30, 1935. On that particular flight the Boeing pilot was merely an observer. Somehow the Boeing pilot managed to fly the Model 299 to Wright Field from Seattle without incident. Best Wishes, John A. Jenkins 6910 Old Redmond Road Redmond, WA 98052 USA Phone (425) 885-0595 --part1_82.d6a3ecf.288c9fb7_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bill Heller

FYI - Two Army pilots were at the controls of the Boeing Model 299 when it
crashed at Wright Field on October 30, 1935.  On that particular flight the
Boeing pilot was merely an observer.  Somehow the Boeing pilot managed to fly
the Model 299 to Wright Field from Seattle without incident.

Best Wishes,    

John A. Jenkins

6910 Old Redmond Road
Redmond, WA   98052   USA

Phone (425) 885-0595 --part1_82.d6a3ecf.288c9fb7_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sun Jul 22 22:14:35 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Jim Walling) Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 11:14:35 -1000 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Moleworth Hangar and "The Bomb" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20010722111435.0088f460@ilhawaii.net> At 04:03 PM 7/22/01 -0500, you wrote: >Were any of you guys at Molesworth the night the RAF bombed you? If so, >what do you remember? I have seen a few written stories. I have even seen >the hole in the hangar and the dent it made in the floor! I did read one >story Harry sent me about the guys in the tower who witnessed the event. I >think the date was like 24 December 44, I hope that is right Harry. >Kevin > > On 24 dec1944 a lot of us were fogged in at Snetterton Heath Jim walling From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sun Jul 22 22:48:31 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 17:48:31 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: Boeing Legacy Message-ID: <103.6580d08.288ca42f@aol.com> john you are a real source and so pleased to read your input. cheers. spec From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sun Jul 22 23:16:53 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Dick Smith) Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 15:16:53 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying References: Message-ID: <001101c112fc$03e6cb00$83f833cf@richards> Kevin: There was A SCOUTING FORCE FOR EACH DIVISION.Check out Little Friends Web page The scouts have a site there which will answer all of your questions Site address HTTP://www.pyker.dircon.co.uk Enjoy Spider ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin Pearson" To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 1:53 PM Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > ThANKS Spider! Was there more than one scouting force? I have to get to > the bottom of this. > Kevin > > > >From: "Dick Smith" > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > >Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 11:43:58 -0700 > > > >Kevin : > >I checked the book and don't find your friends name . Check with Dick > >Atkins > >at dick8af@flesh.net > > Spider > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Kevin Pearson" > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > >Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 7:09 AM > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > > > > > > > Hi Spider! Yep, that is the same reaction Dave Flint with the 44th > >BG(H) > > > had, only his chicken wasn't rotten. It was canned and I guess pretty > > > awful. Dave nevertouched chicken again either. > > > > > > So if you threw up in your oxygen mask, didn't that freeze and clog the > > > system? I know nothing about the operation of an oxygen mask, but I > >heard > > > they were prone to freezing up. > > > > > > Another question: I know how guys took a leak in the bombers, but what > >did > > > you fighter guys do when nature called? Did you have a bottle or > >something? > > > And if you did urinate in a bottle, I would think at altitude there > >would > > > be a lot of steam to fog your canopy? Is this so? > > > > > > I may have asked you this once before, but did you ever know a Tom > >Liston? > > > He transitioned from 17s to 51s and I believe he was in the Scouting > >Force, > > > too. He is the former owner of Bergners Department Stores which are > >popular > > > in Illinois. > > > Kevin > > > > > > > > > >From: "Dick Smith" > > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > > > >Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 15:48:38 -0700 > > > > > > > >Kevin: > > > > Scotch isn't Scotch if it's made in the USA.We got Bourbon and I gave > > > >mine > > > >to my Bombardier who really needed it. When I was flying 51's in the > > > >Scouting Force we got Chicken which the loaded frozen off the ships on > > > >Monday there being no Refrigeration in Blighty at that time when they > > > >served > > > >it on the following Sunday it was Rotten pull off a leg and it was > >green > > > >inside. We had 24 pilots and on Monday they couldn't find 8 pilots to > >fly > > > >who weren't sick. I upchucked chicken in my oxygen mask . Haven't eaten > > > >chicken since then. > > > > Spider > > > >----- Original Message ----- > > > >From: "Kevin Pearson" > > > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > > > >Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 9:13 AM > > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Army Air Corps Food/Flying > > > > > > > > > > > > > Just out of curiosity, what was your favorite food served at your > >Bomb > > > > > Group, and what kinds of food did they have? I heard one story from > >a > > > >44th > > > > > BG pilot that early in the war they were serving canned chicken that > > > >came > > > >in > > > > > 55 gallon drums. He said the canned chicken gave guys a bad case of > >gas > > > >and > > > > > at altitude, the gas became excrutiatingly painful, that several > >ships > > > > > returned to base because of the many stomach aches. Any similar > > > >experiences > > > > > about how food affected you at altitude. > > > > > > > > > > And does anyone remember the brand name of the Scotch given > >following > >a > > > > > mission? Was it US or British made? > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at > >http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Jul 23 01:01:11 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 20:01:11 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: 303rd-Talk digest, Vol 1 #345 - 12 msgs Message-ID: <74.d7799e3.288cc347@aol.com> --part1_74.d7799e3.288cc347_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The British Bombed Molesworth on July 4, 1944 - Independence Day - Retribution for our 1776 Freedom?? The RAF was executing practice bombing runs at night. The bombing range was about 15 miles northwest of our Molesworth airfield. When the bombs were released the Bombardier would transmit "Number one Bomb gone"., Numbner two bomb gone", etc. Our Molesworth Tower Operators because accustomed to hearing these RAF transmittals almost very time they were on duty. On this occasion we had two 303rd BG(H) B-17's doing some night flying and therefore we had our runway lights on as well as our ID circle directly in front of the tower. After Tower Operator Robert L. Johnson heard "Number One bomb gone" he heard and explosion and "Whoom". The first RAF practfce bomb hit behind the tower and a little toward the main hanger. The second bomb went through the roof of the main hanger. The British Bombardier had mistaken our ID lights in front of the tower as their night bombing range. Robert Johnson immediately called RAFD Operations people and advised them of the rather "serious deviation from course" of thewir aircraft. They apologized and sent someone out to investigate the incident. Two days later the King and Queen and theoir children were on the base. That RAF Bombardier kissed the tower by about 50 feet. Postscript: The 250 pound practice bomb went through the T-Hanger roof , landed on the floor and left a dent on the concrete. The patched up roof hole and floor dent have been preserved and can still be observed today. Present RAF Molesworth Joint Analysis Center personnel take great delight in showing visitors the T-Hanger damage when the British bombed RAF Molesworth on Independence Day 1944. Harry D. Gobrecht --part1_74.d7799e3.288cc347_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The British Bombed Molesworth on July 4, 1944 - Independence Day -
Retribution for our 1776 Freedom??

The RAF was executing practice bombing runs at night.  The bombing range was
about 15 miles northwest  of our Molesworth airfield.  When the bombs were
released the Bombardier would transmit "Number one Bomb gone"., Numbner two
bomb gone", etc.  Our Molesworth Tower Operators because accustomed to
hearing these RAF transmittals almost very time they were on duty.
On this occasion we had two 303rd BG(H) B-17's doing some night flying and
therefore we had our runway lights on as well as our ID circle directly in
front of the tower.  After Tower Operator Robert L. Johnson heard "Number One
bomb gone" he heard and explosion and "Whoom".  The first RAF practfce bomb
hit behind the tower and a little toward the main hanger.  The second bomb
went through the roof of the main hanger.  The British Bombardier had
mistaken our ID lights in front of the tower as their night bombing range.  
Robert Johnson immediately called RAFD Operations people and advised them of
the rather "serious deviation from course"
of thewir aircraft.  They apologized and sent someone out to investigate the
incident.  Two days later the King and Queen and theoir children were on the
base.  That RAF Bombardier kissed the tower by about 50 feet.
Postscript:  The 250 pound practice bomb went through the T-Hanger roof ,
landed on the floor and left a dent on the concrete.  The patched up roof
hole and floor dent have been preserved and can still be observed today.  
Present RAF Molesworth
Joint Analysis Center personnel take great delight in showing visitors the
T-Hanger damage when the British bombed RAF Molesworth on Independence Day
1944.

Harry D. Gobrecht --part1_74.d7799e3.288cc347_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Jul 23 01:37:04 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (William Heller) Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 17:37:04 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] B24s vs B17s References: Message-ID: <3B5B71B0.400137F1@attglobal.net> Kevin Pearons ... The TW800 is a complete coverup. If the theories put forth by the so-called "experts" as to the tank exploding, due to being in such hot areas, etc., then we would be losing a 747 every few weeks. What about those planes which transit the Persian Gulf? I have been at aerdromes in the Persian Gulf area and Arabia when I could not takeoff until evening due to ambient temperatures. EGT (Exhaust Gas Temperature) limits are affected no matter WHAT gives the temperature ... Sun (ambient air) or Engine combustion. And just WHAT atomized that residual fuel sufficiently to even BECOME volatile? The above is my theory only, but I believe TW800 was downed by a missile, either OURS, or TERRORISTS (in a boat). There is far too much evidence COVERED up which proves this. PICTURES of missiles going TOWARD the 747 at the time of the flash. Also, several military C130s were in the area PRECISELY because there were to be military operations in the air to include missiles. However, it is a coverup and those who have had previous experience KNOW that it is futile to further concern ourselves with it. Our government doe not "terminate" people for saying or doing things against their reasoning .... they just ruin them for life. Such as the experienced pilots with pictures and RESIDUE of a missile nature FOUND on the seats in the area where the ???? entered the 747. These people have been ruined and in some cases, have civil action pending against them. I fought an enemy in WW#2 (the one we won) which was supposed to be doing a lot of the things we now see our OWN government doing. YOU CANNOT FIGHT CITY HALL and that phrase is certainly more so today than ever before. Mark it down, TW800 was downed by a missile. But, remember, it is only MY opinion. Cheers! Bill Heller Kevin Pearson wrote: > To Bill Heller: I have family in town now and am taking a few days off. > But as they are all at the mall today, I wanted to check from my favorite > frineds. Bill, I have more questions about squadron ops, but must save them > until my company leaves. I'll write more later. Thanks for your response!! > I was at a squadron operations building at the 96th BG at Snetterton Heath > and they have turned the damn thing into a habitat for bats!! At least it > is a peaceful place now! > > One fast questions for you Bill. Could the center fuel tank on TWA 800 have > explosed in your opinion? I'm not buying what the NTSB is selling. Too > many people saw a missle arch up at that 747. Do you have any persoanl > theories? > Cheers! > Kevin > > >From: William Heller > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] B24s vs B17s > >Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 11:41:09 -0700 > > > >Kevin Pearson ... > > > >Anent the 19% ... I never proved nor disproved the figures given us in a > >"welcome" speech. However, when coming home to a 20-bed barracks with 12 > >empty > >beds, it sometimes SEEMS true. I did know of the overall 30% figure, but > >different Groups did suffer varied losses at different times. The 100th > >Bomb > >Group comes to mind. > > > >Whether or not any crewmember just "resigned" himself to a fate... I cannot > >know. I do know on certain missions, after seeing other friends being blow > >up, > >on fire, or going down ... you often wondered just HOW yhou yourself would > >"get > >it" in the vernacular. Were we all scared? YES. I can say to one and all, > >we > >were all scared. BUT used various methods of pruning ourselves for what was > >to > >come once we entered hostile territory. I, myself, used a facade ... I > >would > >sort of jump up and down in my seat and mouth words such as, "Come on up > >you > >Luftwaffe! We're waiting for you!" And things such as that. BUT ALL THE > >TIME I > >WAS SCARED STIFF! But, it did, in a way, relieve my fears for the moment. > >And, > >it made for a few jokes among my crew. > > > >Of course, when your squadron loses almost ALL of its airborne force on a > >given > >mission, THEN the 19% seems plausible. As mentioned, when I became CO of > >that > >squadron, I DID caution the Ground Exec against ever "welcoming" a new crew > >in > >that manner. > > > >The duties of a Squadron Commander? First, he is first in command of the > >squadron. As such, conducts staff meetings and generally learns about ALL > >facets of the squadron effort. Mostly, he is in command of the flying > >echelon, > >though in command of ALL! Also, he writes the sad letters to the families > >to > >those lost in combat. In this endeavor, he would (at least I did) question > >barracks mates as to likes and dislikes of the lost comrade ... this so > >that > >some little ditty or story could be established in the letter to let the > >families know how the lost person was liked and known among his combat > >buddies. The reason for this is that you could not know ALL there was to > >know > >about a certain lost crewmember, etc. Also, the squadron commander was > >required by Army Regulations to be a rated (that is pilot) Officer. He HAD > >to > >wear wings. Thus a Ground Exec who usually ran the ground operation, though > >second in command of the squadron on the ground, would not take over in a > >temporary loss of the CO. This was done by the Operations Office, who was > >also > >rated (a pilot) and thus the Ops Officer was the TRUE second in command. > >Due > >to age, most squadron commander's orders read .... By Direction of the > >President, so-and-so is appointed Commanding Officer of such and such > >squadron. > >This was done so that if there WAS another officer in the squadron who > >outranked the new CO by date-of-rank, it would NOT matter. The new one WAS > >IN > >COMMAND due to that insertion in the orders, of BY DIRECTION OF THE > >PRESIDENT. > >This was usually reduced to the phrase "BY DP" ... > > > >The squadron commander ALSO flys the lead plane in Group, Wing, Division or > >Air > >Force Strike Force leads. Such leads are shared at different times by > >different squadrons. > > > >I hope this answers some of your queries. > > > >Cheers! > > > >Bill Heller > > > >Kevin Pearson wrote: > > > > > Bill: 19%!! That's incredible!! How did you deal with that news? Did > >you > > > just resign yourself to the fact you wouldn't make it? And you were all > > > volonteers. Did you ever think with odds like that that maybe being a > > > ground pounder might not be that bad? 19%! I've read in 42 and 43 > >survival > > > rates for the 8th as a whole was only 30%, but one in five odds of > >making it > > > sure must have been depressing. > > > > > > Yes, the B-24 fought with distinction in all theaters, including the MTO > >and > > > the PTO. In addition, it flew supplies into China and supported the > >Burma > > > campaign, not to mention flying sub patrols here in the States later in > >the > > > war. I think the only safe thing we can say about B-17 and B-24 losses > >is > > > they were too high for each. > > > > > > 19%! I'm not sure how I would have dealt with that, Bill. I guess you > > > gritted your teeth and did what you had to do hoping somehow you'd make > >it. > > > > > > And can you tell me a little more about the duties of a Squadron > >Commander? > > > What were you days like? How did you relate to the other crews in your > > > squadron? > > > > > > Thanks for all your comments, Bill! > > > Kevin > > > > > > >From: William Heller > > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] B24s vs B17s > > > >Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 14:07:59 -0700 > > > > > > > >Kevin Pearson ... > > > > > > > >We have been talking about 17s and 24s as though the ETO was the only > > > >theatre > > > >in which they participated. It must be remembered that the 24 was very > > > >active > > > >in the Pacific Theatre. However, the old saying "there goes the crate > >our > > > >B17 > > > >came in" is still valid when thinking of the sleekness - or NON SUCH - > >of > > > >the > > > >B24. As for stats, I do not think it matters. When I got there they > >told > > > >me > > > >the rate of surviving 25 missions was 19%. When I commanded that > >squadron I > > > >told the Ground Exec to NEVER EVER tell such things to a new crew. > > > > > > > >Cheers! > > > > > > > >Bill Heller > > > > > > > >Kevin Pearson wrote: > > > > > > > > > Another skewing factor is that more B-24s were built than B-17s, > > > >something > > > > > like 12,700 B-17s, and 18,000+ B-24s when you add in the Navy > >variant, > > > >the > > > > > PB4Y-2s. I'm gonna have to leave this debate to someone more > > > >knowladgeable > > > > > than myself in the stats area. There are so many complicating > >factors, > > > >I'm > > > > > not sure all could accurately be taken into account. As Bill Heller > >has > > > > > said, we outproduced Germany and Japan in virtually all areas. And > >what > > > >a > > > > > tribute to the men and women on the homefront! > > > > > Kevin > > > > > > > > > > >From: Steve Hollifield > > > > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > > > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > > > >Subject: [303rd-Talk] B24s vs B17s > > > > > >Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 12:37:54 -0700 (PDT) > > > > > > > > > > > >With reference to the statistical debate, I have a > > > > > >question. If the loss rates for the entire war was > > > > > >similar between the B24s and B17s, couldn't that > > > > > >indicate that the B17s were in fact a more durable AC. > > > > > > I say this because the B17 debuted earlier in the war > > > > > >when bombing tactics and escorts were in their > > > > > >infancy. Once better fighters and better tactics were > > > > > >developed, it stands to reason that loss rates for > > > > > >both AC would become lower. If that is true, the B17s > > > > > >loss rates are skewed to the high side when compared > > > > > >to the B24s since the B17s on average operated in > > > > > >statistically more dangerous skies. > > > > > > > > > > > >Pewwe, stats stink!!!! But, they are interesting. > > > > > > > > > > > >Steve > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >__________________________________________________ > > > > > >Do You Yahoo!? > > > > > >Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail > > > > > >http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at > >http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Jul 23 01:41:10 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (William Heller) Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 17:41:10 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] FOOD ---303RD References: <000d01c112f8$962b6420$40bb9ace@mjpmtman> Message-ID: <3B5B72A6.5A807018@attglobal.net> Paulk ... Re the chow. I used to tell my pilots if they had to crash land to do so in a BRUSSELS SPROUTS field WITH A LOT OF SHEEP IN IT! Cheers! WCH Maurice Paulk wrote: > Never really had any complaints about the food - especially after hearing > what the RAF was served --quite skimpy compared to ours.. The only thing > that really got to me was the green beans or brussell sprouts. Served from a > 20 gal bowler, you had to pull the vegetable throiugh about 8 " of bacon > grease. Even the stews were good but after my first flight I learned not to > eat stew before flying. I had toast and coffee before the Continental > Express flight. We had a pastry cook that was out of this world--after about > two weeks he was sent to the Officers mess. Rumor had it that he was a > crewchief on the line and the crew chief was in the kitchen. > > After we arrived in Oct, 8 1942 we were on British rations for six > months.Spam [pork luncheon loaf] fried for breakfast, mutton stew for dinner > [you coiuld smell the mess hall for a mile} and cold cuts for supper [more > pork luncheon loaf.] The bread although coarse was very good.----Mauice > Paulk From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Jul 23 01:51:16 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (William Heller) Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 17:51:16 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: 303rd-Talk digest, Vol 1 #345 - 12 msgs References: <74.d7799e3.288cc347@aol.com> Message-ID: <3B5B7505.4881948B@attglobal.net> --------------4729033D9673B212E70C3EC7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Gee, Harry! WHAT AN IDEA for maybe such a "mission" some December 7th! Cheers! WCH Pilot8thAF@aol.com wrote: > The British Bombed Molesworth on July 4, 1944 - Independence Day - > Retribution for our 1776 Freedom?? > > The RAF was executing practice bombing runs at night. The bombing > range was > about 15 miles northwest of our Molesworth airfield. When the bombs > were > released the Bombardier would transmit "Number one Bomb gone"., > Numbner two > bomb gone", etc. Our Molesworth Tower Operators because accustomed to > > hearing these RAF transmittals almost very time they were on duty. > On this occasion we had two 303rd BG(H) B-17's doing some night flying > and > therefore we had our runway lights on as well as our ID circle > directly in > front of the tower. After Tower Operator Robert L. Johnson heard > "Number One > bomb gone" he heard and explosion and "Whoom". The first RAF practfce > bomb > hit behind the tower and a little toward the main hanger. The second > bomb > went through the roof of the main hanger. The British Bombardier had > mistaken our ID lights in front of the tower as their night bombing > range. > Robert Johnson immediately called RAFD Operations people and advised > them of > the rather "serious deviation from course" > of thewir aircraft. They apologized and sent someone out to > investigate the > incident. Two days later the King and Queen and theoir children were > on the > base. That RAF Bombardier kissed the tower by about 50 feet. > Postscript: The 250 pound practice bomb went through the T-Hanger > roof , > landed on the floor and left a dent on the concrete. The patched up > roof > hole and floor dent have been preserved and can still be observed > today. > Present RAF Molesworth > Joint Analysis Center personnel take great delight in showing visitors > the > T-Hanger damage when the British bombed RAF Molesworth on Independence > Day > 1944. > > Harry D. Gobrecht --------------4729033D9673B212E70C3EC7 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Gee, Harry!  WHAT AN IDEA  for maybe such a "mission" some December 7th!

Cheers!

WCH

Pilot8thAF@aol.com wrote:

The British Bombed Molesworth on July 4, 1944 - Independence Day -
Retribution for our 1776 Freedom??

The RAF was executing practice bombing runs at night.  The bombing range was
about 15 miles northwest  of our Molesworth airfield.  When the bombs were
released the Bombardier would transmit "Number one Bomb gone"., Numbner two
bomb gone", etc.  Our Molesworth Tower Operators because accustomed to
hearing these RAF transmittals almost very time they were on duty.
On this occasion we had two 303rd BG(H) B-17's doing some night flying and
therefore we had our runway lights on as well as our ID circle directly in
front of the tower.  After Tower Operator Robert L. Johnson heard "Number One
bomb gone" he heard and explosion and "Whoom".  The first RAF practfce bomb
hit behind the tower and a little toward the main hanger.  The second bomb
went through the roof of the main hanger.  The British Bombardier had
mistaken our ID lights in front of the tower as their night bombing range.
Robert Johnson immediately called RAFD Operations people and advised them of
the rather "serious deviation from course"
of thewir aircraft.  They apologized and sent someone out to investigate the
incident.  Two days later the King and Queen and theoir children were on the
base.  That RAF Bombardier kissed the tower by about 50 feet.
Postscript:  The 250 pound practice bomb went through the T-Hanger roof ,
landed on the floor and left a dent on the concrete.  The patched up roof
hole and floor dent have been preserved and can still be observed today.
Present RAF Molesworth
Joint Analysis Center personnel take great delight in showing visitors the
T-Hanger damage when the British bombed RAF Molesworth on Independence Day
1944.

Harry D. Gobrecht

--------------4729033D9673B212E70C3EC7-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Jul 23 03:16:48 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 22:16:48 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: Boeing Legacy Message-ID: <109.2f00052.288ce310@cs.com> --part1_109.2f00052.288ce310_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Spec, I am pleased that you find my comments of interest. Even though I am employed by Boeing I endeavor to present a fair picture of the aircraft industry. Best Wishes, John A. Jenkins 6910 Old Redmond Road Redmond, WA 98052 USA Phone (425) 885-0595 --part1_109.2f00052.288ce310_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Spec,
      I am pleased that you find my comments of interest.  Even though I am
employed by Boeing I endeavor to present a fair picture of the aircraft
industry.

Best Wishes,

John A. Jenkins

6910 Old Redmond Road
Redmond, WA   98052   USA

Phone (425) 885-0595 --part1_109.2f00052.288ce310_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Jul 23 04:33:34 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 23:33:34 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Two Unique Souviniers Message-ID: --part1_dc.964b093.288cf50e_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I inherited two unique and very precious souvenirs from my grandfather. As I previously said, my grandfather was with the 2nd Bomb Group at Langley Field and was one of the original B-17 pilots. Anyway, I have a pilot's flight manual for the "Boeing Y1B-17 Airplane." It is serial number 37. The back page is for notes. On the notes page are bridge scores hand written with pencil in my grandfather's writing. Obvious testimony that the autopilot worked. I also have a bronze table model of the Y1B-17, complete with the skinny vertical stabilizer and gun blisters. It is a beautiful piece. The vertical piece between the airplane and the mahogany base is shaped (I think) like the Chrysler building and has BOEING in large letters. My grandfather's name and rank is engraved on a brass plate on the base. Keep in mind that my grandfather was just a 1st Lt. then, so I assume all the pilots received models. My grandfather was a very "senior 1st Lt., and was an airplane commander. Somewhat prestigious since there were only 12 Y1B-17s flying. A 13th was built but Wright field used it for "yank and pull" tests. I think there were about 30 pilots on the Y1B-17 program. I wonder how many of those flight manuals and models still exist...............................Ford J. Lauer III --part1_dc.964b093.288cf50e_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I inherited two unique and very precious souvenirs from my grandfather. As I
previously said, my grandfather was with the 2nd Bomb Group at Langley Field
and was one of the original B-17 pilots. Anyway, I have a pilot's flight
manual for the "Boeing Y1B-17 Airplane." It is serial number 37. The back
page is for notes. On the notes page are bridge scores hand written with
pencil in my grandfather's writing. Obvious testimony that the autopilot
worked. I also have a bronze table model of the Y1B-17, complete with the
skinny vertical stabilizer and gun blisters. It is a beautiful piece. The
vertical piece between the airplane and the mahogany base is shaped (I think)
like the Chrysler building and has BOEING in large letters. My grandfather's
name and rank is engraved on a brass plate on the base. Keep in mind that my
grandfather was just a 1st Lt. then, so I assume all the pilots received
models. My grandfather was a very "senior 1st Lt., and was an airplane
commander. Somewhat prestigious since there were only 12 Y1B-17s flying. A
13th was built but Wright field used it for "yank and pull" tests. I think
there were about 30 pilots on the Y1B-17 program. I wonder how many of those
flight manuals and models still exist...............................Ford J.
Lauer III --part1_dc.964b093.288cf50e_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Jul 23 16:10:26 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Pierce, Gregory S) Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 08:10:26 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Boeing Legacy Message-ID: <11A611A7F867C24EB1968E0D60B6E7BC02D1E324@XCH-NW-04.nw.nos.boeing.com> ..but as the great aircraft manufacturers they once were, they are gone. Ford J. Lauer III I agree with Mr. Lauer some of the great aircraft mfgs of the WWII period are gone, Douglas made great aircraft i.e. the A-20, C-47 & Dauntless Dive bomber. North American made a number of great aircraft also i.e. the B-25, P-51 etc. Both company's are gone. Having been a Boeing employee for 15 + years, and gone thru the merger of Boeing/McDonald Douglas and talking to many of McD's employee's I too was invited down to tour the facilities in Long Beach and it became very clear that McDonald Douglas was "Done for" in the competitive market. Prior to the merger with Boeing their Management was seeking offers from oversea business's to sell the company, because of their big investment in DOD contracts this was not likely. When Boeing "merged" with them McD they had billions in debts that they could not cover, thus Boeing absorbed this debt load. Yes it is sad to see the great aircraft companies of WWII go by the wayside, Blame it on Boeing... NO blame it on their management. Talk to their employees and ask them about their "pre-merger management" I did and got a earful. Enough preaching, lets get back to the 303rd BG, the men, their missions, their planes! Back in the day's when honor and a handshake meant something. Greg Pierce 8th AFHS - WA State Tel: 206-662-6348, M/S 36-04 E-mail Gregory.Pierce@PSS.Boeing.com From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 24 03:34:32 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 22:34:32 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Boeing Legacy Message-ID: <12a.1dc4582.288e38b8@cs.com> --part1_12a.1dc4582.288e38b8_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Greg Pierce, All that we can do now is look back at the halcyon days when Airbus did not exist, when military contracts were plentiful, and when the upper management of McDonnell-Douglas was somewhere else. Best Wishes, John A. Jenkins 6910 Old Redmond Road Redmond, WA 98052 USA Phone (425) 885-0595 --part1_12a.1dc4582.288e38b8_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Greg Pierce,
      All that we can do now is look back at the halcyon days when Airbus
did not exist, when military contracts were plentiful, and when the upper
management of McDonnell-Douglas was somewhere else.

Best Wishes,

John A. Jenkins

6910 Old Redmond Road
Redmond, WA   98052   USA

Phone (425) 885-0595 --part1_12a.1dc4582.288e38b8_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 24 18:09:15 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 12:09:15 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] TWA 800 Message-ID: Bill: Thanks very much for your personal observations about TWA 800. I didn't think center fuel tanks just ignited by themnselves, and if they did, why hasn't the FAA mandate a correction. Last I checked, this has never happened. Do you know if FAA has mandated corrections to the center fuel tank? Yes, I am also appaulled, no outraged, that our government did not come clean on this accident. When I heard the reports from the C-130 pilots, I knew we had heard lies. The 139th Tactical Airlift Wing of the Missouri Air Guard is based here in St. Joseph, and I have spoken to their C-130 pilots who have spoken with those two who saw MISSLES, and this is the reason for my original question. I hope someone, someday, gets to the bottom of this. Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Kevin >From: William Heller >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] B24s vs B17s >Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 17:37:04 -0700 > >Kevin Pearons ... > >The TW800 is a complete coverup. If the theories put forth by the so-called >"experts" as to the tank exploding, due to being in such hot areas, etc., >then >we would be losing a 747 every few weeks. What about those planes which >transit >the Persian Gulf? I have been at aerdromes in the Persian Gulf area and >Arabia >when I could not takeoff until evening due to ambient temperatures. EGT >(Exhaust Gas Temperature) limits are affected no matter WHAT gives the >temperature ... Sun (ambient air) or Engine combustion. And just WHAT >atomized that residual fuel sufficiently to even BECOME volatile? > >The above is my theory only, but I believe TW800 was downed by a missile, >either OURS, or TERRORISTS (in a boat). There is far too much evidence >COVERED up which proves this. PICTURES of missiles going TOWARD the 747 at >the >time of the flash. Also, several military C130s were in the area PRECISELY >because there were to be military operations in the air to include >missiles. > >However, it is a coverup and those who have had previous experience KNOW >that >it is futile to further concern ourselves with it. Our government doe not >"terminate" people for saying or doing things against their reasoning .... >they >just ruin them for life. Such as the experienced pilots with pictures and >RESIDUE of a missile nature FOUND on the seats in the area where the ???? >entered the 747. These people have been ruined and in some cases, have >civil >action pending against them. I fought an enemy in WW#2 (the one we won) >which >was supposed to be doing a lot of the things we now see our OWN government >doing. YOU CANNOT FIGHT CITY HALL and that phrase is certainly more so >today >than ever before. Mark it down, TW800 was downed by a missile. > >But, remember, it is only MY opinion. > >Cheers! > >Bill Heller > >Kevin Pearson wrote: > > > To Bill Heller: I have family in town now and am taking a few days off. > > But as they are all at the mall today, I wanted to check from my >favorite > > frineds. Bill, I have more questions about squadron ops, but must save >them > > until my company leaves. I'll write more later. Thanks for your >response!! > > I was at a squadron operations building at the 96th BG at Snetterton >Heath > > and they have turned the damn thing into a habitat for bats!! At least >it > > is a peaceful place now! > > > > One fast questions for you Bill. Could the center fuel tank on TWA 800 >have > > explosed in your opinion? I'm not buying what the NTSB is selling. Too > > many people saw a missle arch up at that 747. Do you have any persoanl > > theories? > > Cheers! > > Kevin > > > > >From: William Heller > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] B24s vs B17s > > >Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 11:41:09 -0700 > > > > > >Kevin Pearson ... > > > > > >Anent the 19% ... I never proved nor disproved the figures given us in >a > > >"welcome" speech. However, when coming home to a 20-bed barracks with >12 > > >empty > > >beds, it sometimes SEEMS true. I did know of the overall 30% figure, >but > > >different Groups did suffer varied losses at different times. The >100th > > >Bomb > > >Group comes to mind. > > > > > >Whether or not any crewmember just "resigned" himself to a fate... I >cannot > > >know. I do know on certain missions, after seeing other friends being >blow > > >up, > > >on fire, or going down ... you often wondered just HOW yhou yourself >would > > >"get > > >it" in the vernacular. Were we all scared? YES. I can say to one and >all, > > >we > > >were all scared. BUT used various methods of pruning ourselves for what >was > > >to > > >come once we entered hostile territory. I, myself, used a facade ... I > > >would > > >sort of jump up and down in my seat and mouth words such as, "Come on >up > > >you > > >Luftwaffe! We're waiting for you!" And things such as that. BUT ALL THE > > >TIME I > > >WAS SCARED STIFF! But, it did, in a way, relieve my fears for the >moment. > > >And, > > >it made for a few jokes among my crew. > > > > > >Of course, when your squadron loses almost ALL of its airborne force on >a > > >given > > >mission, THEN the 19% seems plausible. As mentioned, when I became CO >of > > >that > > >squadron, I DID caution the Ground Exec against ever "welcoming" a new >crew > > >in > > >that manner. > > > > > >The duties of a Squadron Commander? First, he is first in command of >the > > >squadron. As such, conducts staff meetings and generally learns about >ALL > > >facets of the squadron effort. Mostly, he is in command of the flying > > >echelon, > > >though in command of ALL! Also, he writes the sad letters to the >families > > >to > > >those lost in combat. In this endeavor, he would (at least I did) >question > > >barracks mates as to likes and dislikes of the lost comrade ... this so > > >that > > >some little ditty or story could be established in the letter to let >the > > >families know how the lost person was liked and known among his combat > > >buddies. The reason for this is that you could not know ALL there was >to > > >know > > >about a certain lost crewmember, etc. Also, the squadron commander was > > >required by Army Regulations to be a rated (that is pilot) Officer. He >HAD > > >to > > >wear wings. Thus a Ground Exec who usually ran the ground operation, >though > > >second in command of the squadron on the ground, would not take over in >a > > >temporary loss of the CO. This was done by the Operations Office, who >was > > >also > > >rated (a pilot) and thus the Ops Officer was the TRUE second in >command. > > >Due > > >to age, most squadron commander's orders read .... By Direction of the > > >President, so-and-so is appointed Commanding Officer of such and such > > >squadron. > > >This was done so that if there WAS another officer in the squadron who > > >outranked the new CO by date-of-rank, it would NOT matter. The new one >WAS > > >IN > > >COMMAND due to that insertion in the orders, of BY DIRECTION OF THE > > >PRESIDENT. > > >This was usually reduced to the phrase "BY DP" ... > > > > > >The squadron commander ALSO flys the lead plane in Group, Wing, >Division or > > >Air > > >Force Strike Force leads. Such leads are shared at different times by > > >different squadrons. > > > > > >I hope this answers some of your queries. > > > > > >Cheers! > > > > > >Bill Heller > > > > > >Kevin Pearson wrote: > > > > > > > Bill: 19%!! That's incredible!! How did you deal with that news? >Did > > >you > > > > just resign yourself to the fact you wouldn't make it? And you were >all > > > > volonteers. Did you ever think with odds like that that maybe being >a > > > > ground pounder might not be that bad? 19%! I've read in 42 and 43 > > >survival > > > > rates for the 8th as a whole was only 30%, but one in five odds of > > >making it > > > > sure must have been depressing. > > > > > > > > Yes, the B-24 fought with distinction in all theaters, including the >MTO > > >and > > > > the PTO. In addition, it flew supplies into China and supported the > > >Burma > > > > campaign, not to mention flying sub patrols here in the States later >in > > >the > > > > war. I think the only safe thing we can say about B-17 and B-24 >losses > > >is > > > > they were too high for each. > > > > > > > > 19%! I'm not sure how I would have dealt with that, Bill. I guess >you > > > > gritted your teeth and did what you had to do hoping somehow you'd >make > > >it. > > > > > > > > And can you tell me a little more about the duties of a Squadron > > >Commander? > > > > What were you days like? How did you relate to the other crews in >your > > > > squadron? > > > > > > > > Thanks for all your comments, Bill! > > > > Kevin > > > > > > > > >From: William Heller > > > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] B24s vs B17s > > > > >Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 14:07:59 -0700 > > > > > > > > > >Kevin Pearson ... > > > > > > > > > >We have been talking about 17s and 24s as though the ETO was the >only > > > > >theatre > > > > >in which they participated. It must be remembered that the 24 was >very > > > > >active > > > > >in the Pacific Theatre. However, the old saying "there goes the >crate > > >our > > > > >B17 > > > > >came in" is still valid when thinking of the sleekness - or NON >SUCH - > > >of > > > > >the > > > > >B24. As for stats, I do not think it matters. When I got there >they > > >told > > > > >me > > > > >the rate of surviving 25 missions was 19%. When I commanded that > > >squadron I > > > > >told the Ground Exec to NEVER EVER tell such things to a new crew. > > > > > > > > > >Cheers! > > > > > > > > > >Bill Heller > > > > > > > > > >Kevin Pearson wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Another skewing factor is that more B-24s were built than B-17s, > > > > >something > > > > > > like 12,700 B-17s, and 18,000+ B-24s when you add in the Navy > > >variant, > > > > >the > > > > > > PB4Y-2s. I'm gonna have to leave this debate to someone more > > > > >knowladgeable > > > > > > than myself in the stats area. There are so many complicating > > >factors, > > > > >I'm > > > > > > not sure all could accurately be taken into account. As Bill >Heller > > >has > > > > > > said, we outproduced Germany and Japan in virtually all areas. >And > > >what > > > > >a > > > > > > tribute to the men and women on the homefront! > > > > > > Kevin > > > > > > > > > > > > >From: Steve Hollifield > > > > > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > > > > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > > > > >Subject: [303rd-Talk] B24s vs B17s > > > > > > >Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 12:37:54 -0700 (PDT) > > > > > > > > > > > > > >With reference to the statistical debate, I have a > > > > > > >question. If the loss rates for the entire war was > > > > > > >similar between the B24s and B17s, couldn't that > > > > > > >indicate that the B17s were in fact a more durable AC. > > > > > > > I say this because the B17 debuted earlier in the war > > > > > > >when bombing tactics and escorts were in their > > > > > > >infancy. Once better fighters and better tactics were > > > > > > >developed, it stands to reason that loss rates for > > > > > > >both AC would become lower. If that is true, the B17s > > > > > > >loss rates are skewed to the high side when compared > > > > > > >to the B24s since the B17s on average operated in > > > > > > >statistically more dangerous skies. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Pewwe, stats stink!!!! But, they are interesting. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Steve > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >__________________________________________________ > > > > > > >Do You Yahoo!? > > > > > > >Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail > > > > > > >http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________ > > > > > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at >http://explorer.msn.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at > > >http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at >http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 25 19:10:40 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 13:10:40 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Two Unique Souviniers Message-ID: At the risk of offending you, how about donating the pilot manual and B-17 model to a museum? Many people could then see it and appreciate what your grandfather did. In my very humble opinion, stuff like that should be in a museum for the sake of history. May I suggest the Air Force Museum at Wright Patt AFB in Dayton, Ohio, or the Mighty Eighth Air Foce Heritage Museum in Savannah, Georgia? I know it's hard to give up precious momentos, but please consider it. Kevin Pearson >From: Fordlauer@aol.com >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: 303rd-talk@303rdbga.com >Subject: [303rd-Talk] Two Unique Souviniers >Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 23:33:34 EDT > >I inherited two unique and very precious souvenirs from my grandfather. As >I >previously said, my grandfather was with the 2nd Bomb Group at Langley >Field >and was one of the original B-17 pilots. Anyway, I have a pilot's flight >manual for the "Boeing Y1B-17 Airplane." It is serial number 37. The back >page is for notes. On the notes page are bridge scores hand written with >pencil in my grandfather's writing. Obvious testimony that the autopilot >worked. I also have a bronze table model of the Y1B-17, complete with the >skinny vertical stabilizer and gun blisters. It is a beautiful piece. The >vertical piece between the airplane and the mahogany base is shaped (I >think) >like the Chrysler building and has BOEING in large letters. My >grandfather's >name and rank is engraved on a brass plate on the base. Keep in mind that >my >grandfather was just a 1st Lt. then, so I assume all the pilots received >models. My grandfather was a very "senior 1st Lt., and was an airplane >commander. Somewhat prestigious since there were only 12 Y1B-17s flying. A >13th was built but Wright field used it for "yank and pull" tests. I think >there were about 30 pilots on the Y1B-17 program. I wonder how many of >those >flight manuals and models still exist...............................Ford J. >Lauer III _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 25 19:12:30 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 13:12:30 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] To: Ford Laurer Message-ID: Hi Ford! Where do you live and did your grandfather live in Peoria, Illinois? My flying instructor's name was Oren Lauer - any relation? Kevin >From: "Pierce, Gregory S" >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: "'303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com'" <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> >Subject: [303rd-Talk] Boeing Legacy >Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 08:10:26 -0700 > >..but as the great aircraft manufacturers they once were, >they are gone. Ford J. Lauer III > >I agree with Mr. Lauer some of the great aircraft mfgs of the >WWII period are gone, Douglas made great aircraft i.e. the A-20, C-47 & >Dauntless Dive bomber. North American made a number of great aircraft >also i.e. the B-25, P-51 etc. Both company's are gone. >Having been a Boeing employee for 15 + years, and >gone thru the merger of Boeing/McDonald Douglas and talking >to many of McD's employee's I too was invited down to tour >the facilities in Long Beach and it became very clear that McDonald Douglas >was "Done for" in the competitive market. Prior to the merger with Boeing >their Management was seeking offers from oversea business's to sell >the company, because of their big investment in DOD contracts this >was not likely. When Boeing "merged" with them McD they had billions >in debts that they could not cover, thus Boeing absorbed this debt load. >Yes it is sad to see the great aircraft companies of WWII go by the >wayside, >Blame it on Boeing... NO blame it on their management. Talk to >their employees and ask them about their "pre-merger management" >I did and got a earful. Enough preaching, lets get back to the >303rd BG, the men, their missions, their planes! Back in the day's >when honor and a handshake meant something. > > >Greg Pierce >8th AFHS - WA State >Tel: 206-662-6348, M/S 36-04 >E-mail Gregory.Pierce@PSS.Boeing.com > > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Wed Jul 25 22:12:47 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Bill Jones) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 17:12:47 -0400 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Two Unique Souviniers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > At the risk of offending you, how about donating the pilot manual and B-17 > model to a museum? Many people could then see it and appreciate what your > grandfather did. In my very humble opinion, stuff like that should be in a > museum for the sake of history. May I suggest the Air Force Museum at > Wright Patt AFB in Dayton, Ohio, or the Mighty Eighth Air Foce Heritage > Museum in Savannah, Georgia? I know it's hard to give up precious momentos, > but please consider it. I know that this topic has come up before, and that I probably have an unpopular opinion, but I wanted to say that I think most such artifacts are better off staying right where they are, with individuals. Most of the artifacts that those of us have, would have been completely useless to anyone if they had been given to a museum, because most museums don't have the space to display everything, most of the items would have been put away in storage, and would likely never again see the light of day. Museums are good at preserving old items, but are not good at indexing what they have, and making it available to researchers, and the public. I would much rather see people photograph what they have, and put the pictures on the web so that we all can enjoy them. I would never consider even for a minute donating anything I have to a museum, unless that museum had an on-line index of their holdings, including photographs of every item. The only archive that even comes close to that criteria, even as a goal, is NARA. I know that it is important to preserve our history, but it is equally important for us to be able to have access to our history, and having some museum pack these items away in boxes somewhere is not preserving history, it is burying it. Plus much of the history is not the item itself, but the story behind the item. Items like those described by Mr Lauer are much more valuable when kept with someone who knows what they are, and the story behind them. Given to a museum they are only a couple documents. They are much more valuable staying with him, since he knows the story behind them. Anyway, I don't think anyone should feel bad about keeping items in their own personal collections. Just make sure you preserve the items as well as possible, document the stories associated with the items, and if possible take pictures and share them with the rest of us on the internet. I think the internet is the future of making historical items available to the public, and the most efficient way of getting it there is via individuals. Just my opinion. From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 27 04:20:46 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (VONDRA BURRELL) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 22:20:46 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Two Unique Souviniers Message-ID: ------=_NextPart_001_0000_01C11621.37E57140 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To all, I agree that museums are great for large items that are expensive to care= for and store, but for the smaller items of significance, they are bette= r kept with those who know about them. This does bring an obligation to = let those around you know what it is and exactly what to do with them whe= n you are gone! Lance Burrell ----- Original Message ----- From: Bill Jones Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 11:18 PM To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Two Unique Souviniers > At the risk of offending you, how about donating the pilot manual and B= -17 > model to a museum? Many people could then see it and appreciate what y= our > grandfather did. In my very humble opinion, stuff like that should be = in a > museum for the sake of history. May I suggest the Air Force Museum at > Wright Patt AFB in Dayton, Ohio, or the Mighty Eighth Air Foce Heritage > Museum in Savannah, Georgia? I know it's hard to give up precious mome= ntos, > but please consider it. I know that this topic has come up before, and that I probably have an unpopular opinion, but I wanted to say that I think most such artifacts are better off staying right where they are, with individuals. Most of t= he artifacts that those of us have, would have been completely useless to anyone if they had been given to a museum, because most museums don't have the space to display everything, most of the items would have been put away in storage, and would likely never again see the light of day. Museums are good at preserving old items, but are not good at indexing what they have, and making it available to researchers, and the public. I would much rather see people photograph what they have, and put the pictures on the web so that we all can enjoy them. I would never consider even for a minute donating anything I have to a museum, unless that museum had an on-line index of their holdings, including photographs of every item. The only archive that even comes close to that criteria, even as a goal, is NARA. I know that it is important to preserve our history, but it is equally important for us to be able to have access to our history, and having some museum pack these items away in boxes somewhere is not preserving history, it is burying it. Plus much of the history is not th= e item itself, but the story behind the item. Items like those described b= y Mr Lauer are much more valuable when kept with someone who knows what they are, and the story behind them. Given to a museum they are only a couple documents. They are much more valuable staying with him, since he knows the story behind them. Anyway, I don't think anyone should feel bad about keeping items in their own personal collections. Just make sure you preserve the items as well as possible, document the stories associated with the items, and if possible take pictures and share them with the rest of us on the internet. I think the internet is the future of making historical items availabl= e to the public, and the most efficient way of getting it there is via individ= uals. Just my opinion. ------=_NextPart_001_0000_01C11621.37E57140 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
To all,
=
I agree that museums are great for large items that are expensive to= care for and store, but for the smaller items of significance, they are = better kept with those who know about them.  This does bring an obli= gation to let those around you know what it is and exactly what to do wit= h them when you are gone!
Lance Burrell
 
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Jones
Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001= 11:18 PM
To: 303rd-talk@303= rdBGA.com
Subject: Re: [303r= d-Talk] Two Unique Souviniers
 

> At the risk= of offending you, how about donating the pilot manual and B-17
> m= odel to a museum?  Many people could then see it and appreciate what= your
> grandfather did.  In my very humble opinion, stuff lik= e that should be in a
> museum for the sake of history.  May I= suggest the Air Force Museum at
> Wright Patt AFB in Dayton, Ohio,= or the Mighty Eighth Air Foce Heritage
> Museum in Savannah, Georg= ia?  I know it's hard to give up precious momentos,
> but plea= se consider it.

I know that this topic has come up before, and tha= t I probably have an
unpopular opinion, but I wanted to say that I thi= nk most such artifacts
are better off staying right where they are, wi= th individuals.  Most of the
artifacts that those of us have, wou= ld have been completely useless to
anyone if they had been given to a = museum, because most museums
don't have the space to display everythin= g, most of the items would
have been put away in storage, and would li= kely never again see the light
of day.  Museums are good at prese= rving old items, but are not good at
indexing what they have, and maki= ng it available to researchers, and the
public.
   I woul= d much rather see people photograph what they have, and put
the pictur= es on the web so that we all can enjoy them.   I would neverconsider even for a minute donating anything I have to a museum, unless<= BR>that museum had an on-line index of their holdings, including
photo= graphs of every item.  The only archive that even comes close to
= that criteria, even as a goal, is NARA.
   I know that it is= important to preserve our history, but it is equally
important for us= to be able to have access to our history, and having
some museum pack= these items away in boxes somewhere is not
preserving history, it is = burying it.  Plus much of the history is not the
item itself, but= the story behind the item.  Items like those described by
Mr Lau= er are much more valuable when kept with someone who knows
what they a= re, and the story behind them.  Given to a museum they are
only a= couple documents.  They are much more valuable staying with
him,= since he knows the story behind them.
   Anyway, I don't th= ink anyone should feel bad about keeping items in
their own personal c= ollections.  Just make sure you preserve the items
as well as pos= sible, document the stories associated with the items, and
if possible= take pictures and share them with the rest of us on the
internet.
=    I think the internet is the future of making historical item= s available to
the public, and the most efficient way of getting it th= ere is via individuals.
Just my opinion.





------=_NextPart_001_0000_01C11621.37E57140-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 27 16:03:09 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Bill Jones) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 11:03:09 -0400 Subject: [303rd-Talk] off topic.... is there any other military plane that looks like a B-52? Message-ID: Strange subject I know, but I live directly under an AF military MTR training route, and get a lot of fighters and such flying over all the time. Well yesterday afternoon, I heard a LOUD roar, but instead of a little F- 16 wizzing by as usual, it just slowly got louder and louder, and by the time I could see it through the trees, it was what appeared to be a B-52, flying at low altitude, probably only 500' above the ground. However when I went to look up a picture of a B-52 though, I'm not sure. The plane I saw seemed to have a slightly different tail than that in the pictures I've seen, but it had the same slim swept back wings, and was not as "fat" a cargo jet, but rather had a fuselage similar in shape to a bomber, and was BIG. It "seemed to have 4 engines, but could have been 4 "groups of engines" as are on the B-52. I really think it was a B-52, but I'm wondering if anyone can suggest something else that generally looks like a B-52 that it might have been? Whatever it was, it was impressive. I've seen them on display, but never flying, at least that close. Sorry for being off topic, but I'd really like to know what I saw, and I know many of you are familiar with all sorts of military aircraft. Thanks. Bill Jones Sweden Maine N3JLQ wejones@megalink.net htpp://www.megalink.net/~wejones TVRO,Space,Ham radio,WX htpp://www.megalink.net/~wejones/wwii.html B-17/wwii/303rdBG From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 27 16:09:46 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Tooley, Dave) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 10:09:46 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] off topic.... is there any other military plane that looks like a B-52? Message-ID: Bill, Why is it that UFO's only appear out in the middle of nowhere? Dave Tooley -----Original Message----- From: Bill Jones [SMTP:wejones@megalink.net] Sent: Friday, July 27, 2001 10:03 AM To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Subject: [303rd-Talk] off topic.... is there any other military plane that looks like a B-52? Strange subject I know, but I live directly under an AF military MTR training route, and get a lot of fighters and such flying over all the time. Well yesterday afternoon, I heard a LOUD roar, but instead of a little F- 16 wizzing by as usual, it just slowly got louder and louder, and by the time I could see it through the trees, it was what appeared to be a B-52, flying at low altitude, probably only 500' above the ground. However when I went to look up a picture of a B-52 though, I'm not sure. The plane I saw seemed to have a slightly different tail than that in the pictures I've seen, but it had the same slim swept back wings, and was not as "fat" a cargo jet, but rather had a fuselage similar in shape to a bomber, and was BIG. It "seemed to have 4 engines, but could have been 4 "groups of engines" as are on the B-52. I really think it was a B-52, but I'm wondering if anyone can suggest something else that generally looks like a B-52 that it might have been? Whatever it was, it was impressive. I've seen them on display, but never flying, at least that close. Sorry for being off topic, but I'd really like to know what I saw, and I know many of you are familiar with all sorts of military aircraft. Thanks. Bill Jones Sweden Maine N3JLQ wejones@megalink.net htpp://www.megalink.net/~wejones TVRO,Space,Ham radio,WX htpp://www.megalink.net/~wejones/wwii.html B-17/wwii/303rdBG From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 27 16:56:22 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Bill Jones) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 11:56:22 -0400 Subject: [303rd-Talk] off topic.... is there any other military plane that looks like a B-52? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > Why is it that UFO's only appear out in the middle of nowhere? Sorry for more wasted bandwidth, but I think I figured out what my UFO was. On looking through pictures some more, I now think that it wasn't a B-52, but instead was a KC-135. Mainly because I definately remember a forward facing piece of metal at the top of the tail. I only saw the thing for about 5 seconds as it appeared through the trees, but it sure looked like a B-52. I can't imagine why they would be flying a KC- 135 at 500' though. Sorry for wasting bandwidth. Bill Jones Sweden Maine N3JLQ wejones@megalink.net htpp://www.megalink.net/~wejones TVRO,Space,Ham radio,WX htpp://www.megalink.net/~wejones/wwii.html B-17/wwii/303rdBG From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Jul 27 19:48:14 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 13:48:14 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] off topic.... is there any other military plane that looks like a B-52? Message-ID: Bill: The 139th Air Lift Wing of the Missouri Air National Guard here in St. Joseph, Missouri, has one of only 12 Precision Appraoch Control mobile radar sets in the world and has the ability to land heavy aircraft in lower weather minimums than even Kansas City International Airport. As a result of this unique asset, many military planes come here to shoot appraches to stay current and we have had many KC-135 Tankers here. My guess would be a KC-135. Those birds are just damn noisy, there is no other way to put it. They remind me of the 707s from the 60s. When I was a kid, we lived on the approach slope of one of San Fransico's runways and those damn 707s would come in about 500' AGL and would shake our house like a leaf. And the KC-135 seem just as loud. Kevin >From: "Bill Jones" >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >Subject: RE: [303rd-Talk] off topic.... is there any other military plane > that looks like a B-52? >Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 11:56:22 -0400 > > > Why is it that UFO's only appear out in the middle of nowhere? > >Sorry for more wasted bandwidth, but I think I figured out what my UFO >was. On looking through pictures some more, I now think that it wasn't >a B-52, but instead was a KC-135. Mainly because I definately >remember a forward facing piece of metal at the top of the tail. I only >saw the thing for about 5 seconds as it appeared through the trees, but it >sure looked like a B-52. I can't imagine why they would be flying a KC- >135 at 500' though. >Sorry for wasting bandwidth. > >Bill Jones Sweden Maine N3JLQ wejones@megalink.net >htpp://www.megalink.net/~wejones TVRO,Space,Ham radio,WX >htpp://www.megalink.net/~wejones/wwii.html B-17/wwii/303rdBG > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sat Jul 28 04:30:50 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 23:30:50 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] off topic.... is there any other military plane that looks l... Message-ID: <46.183651d7.28938bea@cs.com> --part1_46.183651d7.28938bea_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Kevin, I believe military aircraft are exempt from the various noise initiatives which have surfaced in recent decades. When I was in Guam, the B52s landing at Andersen AFB would generally fly over several Naval installations on final approach due to prevailing winds. I do not know if this was on purpose or not, but these aircraft were low, noisy, and emitted soot. If you were wearing a khaki uniform it was no big deal, but if you were wearing whites it was not a pretty picture. Best Wishes, John A. Jenkins 6910 Old Redmond Road Redmond, WA 98052 USA Phone (425) 885-0595 --part1_46.183651d7.28938bea_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Kevin,
      I believe military aircraft are exempt from the various noise
initiatives which have surfaced in recent decades.  When I was in Guam, the
B52s landing at Andersen AFB would generally fly over several Naval
installations on final approach due to prevailing winds.  I do not know if
this was on purpose or not, but these aircraft were low, noisy, and emitted
soot.  If you were wearing a khaki uniform it was no big deal, but if you
were wearing whites it was not a pretty picture.

Best Wishes,

John A. Jenkins

6910 Old Redmond Road
Redmond, WA   98052   USA

Phone (425) 885-0595 --part1_46.183651d7.28938bea_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sat Jul 28 13:37:02 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Bill Jones) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 08:37:02 -0400 Subject: [303rd-Talk] off topic.... is there any other military plane that looks l... In-Reply-To: <46.183651d7.28938bea@cs.com> Message-ID: > I believe military aircraft are exempt from the various noise > initiatives which have surfaced in recent decades. I don't think they are exempt, but they certainly have rules of their own. According to a document I found, they are permitted to fly as low as 100' above my house, at relatively high speed. This MTR is a specific route they have to follow, that is about a mile wide, but it is centered right over my house. When the fighters come over, they are almost gone by the time I hear them, and when you hear them, it shakes the house. When I looked up the details of the route, there were certain areas that it said that they had to maintain at least 500' AGL because it was "Extremely Noise Sensitive", which is strange since most of the land in that section is uninhabited forest. They sure don't seem to care about noise over my house though, which is nice, because I get closeup views of all sorts of planes, although mostly fighters, as I think the route is owned by 104 FG, Barnes ANGB. I'm a bit disapointed that this recent plane wasn't a bomber, but it was still an impressive plane. I'm mainly embarrassed that I mistook a re-fueling plane for a bomber. This section of the route is pretty close to the route that the B-17s took on their way to/from the ETO. Whenever these planes fly over, it makes me think of what it would have been like to see all those bombers fly over back then. Bill Jones Sweden Maine N3JLQ wejones@megalink.net htpp://www.megalink.net/~wejones TVRO,Space,Ham radio,WX htpp://www.megalink.net/~wejones/wwii.html B-17/wwii/303rdBG From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sat Jul 28 18:10:11 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 13:10:11 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] off topic.... is there any other military plane that looks l... Message-ID: <86.d3f5c1f.28944bf3@cs.com> --part1_86.d3f5c1f.28944bf3_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bill Jones, Looking back through earlier emails, I found your original question concerning the B52. I know of no other US military aircraft that comes close the unique profile of the B52. As I mentioned earlier, I have seen them flying in Guam on final approach. It is a very impressive sight. Best Wishes, John A. Jenkins 6910 Old Redmond Road Redmond, WA 98052 USA Phone (425) 885-0595 --part1_86.d3f5c1f.28944bf3_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bill Jones,
      Looking back through earlier emails, I found your original question
concerning the B52.  I know of no other US military aircraft that comes close
the unique profile of the B52.  As I mentioned earlier, I have seen them
flying in Guam on final approach.  It is a very impressive sight.

Best Wishes,  

John A. Jenkins

6910 Old Redmond Road
Redmond, WA   98052   USA

Phone (425) 885-0595 --part1_86.d3f5c1f.28944bf3_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sat Jul 28 23:44:51 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 18:44:51 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Some Loose Ends, Boeing, and McDonnell-Douglas Message-ID: <60.1193f9a5.28949a63@cs.com> --part1_60.1193f9a5.28949a63_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Several days ago a question was raised concerning which aircraft were in competition with the Boeing Model 299 to replace the Martin B10. These aircraft were the Douglas B18 and the Martin 146 (an improved B10). This information can now be viewed at the Air Force Museum web site at www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/modern_flight/mf2.htm. Since we appear to have reached a lull in activity, I do not believe that anyone will mind if I comment further concerning relationship between Boeing and McDonnell-Douglas. 137,000 combat aircraft were produced during WWII. Of this number 12,000 were B17s. Boeing produced 7,000 B17s in Seattle while Douglas Aircraft and Lockheed built the remaining 5,000 under license. All Boeing built B17s were assembled at Plant II across the street from Boeing Field in Seattle. Plant II was constructed to accommodate the B17 program and still stands. Before the recent decision to move Boeing upper management to Chicago, Boeing corporate offices were located a few feet north of Plant II. At peak production, 16 B17s were 'rolled out' every day in Seattle. This level of production combined with the contributions by Douglas and Lockheed would provide replacements for combat losses. As I indicated in a previous submittal, Douglas dominated the commercial aircraft market well into the 1950s. Since the introduction of the Boeing Model 707, no other aircraft manufacturer in the world has sold more commercial jet liners than the Boeing Company. The beginning of this dominance was clearly demonstrated when a Boeing test pilot (Tex Johnston) barrel rolled the 707 prototype. I have seen photos which document this event. Whether Boeing management knew of Johnston's intentions has not been determined. Bill Heller alluded to the fact that Boeing became preeminent by emphasizing safety. Were these safety issues exacerbated by a fatal design error in the original DC10? This defective design would lead to the 1974 crash of a Turkish Airlines DC10 after takeoff near Paris, France. There were no survivors. The design flaw surfaced because the aft cargo door was not closed properly. No fool proof method existed for the ground crew to determine whether the cargo door was closed for flight. As the DC10 ascended after takeoff, pressurization of the cabin forced the cargo door open. The resulting explosive depressurization caused the cabin floor to collapse onto the horizontal and vertical control cables. At this point the control cables were rendered useless and an uncontrolled descent into the ground was imminent. Warning signs of this impending catastrophe were provided, but timely and appropriate action was not taken. Some time the merger of McDonnell and Douglas, the DC10 would be renamed the MD11. As far as I know there are no plans to continue production of the DC10/MD11. I am unaware of any Boeing commercial jet liner that crashed due to a design flaw. Recent investigations of Boeing 737 and 747 crashes have been inconclusive as to cause. Bill Heller, with your vast flying experience, I welcome any comments you may have concerning the relative safety of Boeing and McDonnell-Douglas aircraft. Also, if anyone has any comments concerning the durability of the B17 I would welcome them as well. What I state here is meant to result in an open discussion. No offense is intended. Best Wishes, John A. Jenkins 6910 Old Redmond Road Redmond, WA 98052 USA Phone (425) 885-0595 --part1_60.1193f9a5.28949a63_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit      Several days ago a question was raised concerning which aircraft were
in competition with the Boeing Model 299 to replace the Martin B10.  These
aircraft were the Douglas B18 and the Martin 146 (an improved B10).  This
information can now be viewed at the Air Force Museum web site at    

            www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/modern_flight/mf2.htm.

      Since we appear to have reached a lull in activity, I do not believe
that anyone will mind if I comment further concerning relationship between
Boeing and McDonnell-Douglas.  137,000 combat aircraft were produced during
WWII.  Of this number 12,000 were B17s.  Boeing produced 7,000 B17s in
Seattle while Douglas Aircraft and Lockheed built the remaining 5,000 under
license.  All Boeing built B17s were assembled at Plant II across the street
from Boeing Field in Seattle.  Plant II was constructed to accommodate the
B17 program and still stands.  Before the recent decision to move Boeing
upper management to Chicago, Boeing corporate offices were located a few feet
north of Plant II.  At peak production, 16 B17s were 'rolled out' every day
in Seattle.  This level of production combined with the contributions by
Douglas and Lockheed would provide replacements for combat losses.

      As I indicated in a previous submittal, Douglas dominated the
commercial aircraft market well into the 1950s.  Since the introduction of
the Boeing Model 707, no other aircraft manufacturer in the world has sold
more commercial jet liners than the Boeing Company.  The beginning of this
dominance was clearly demonstrated when a Boeing test pilot (Tex Johnston)
barrel rolled the 707 prototype.  I have seen photos which document this
event.  Whether Boeing management knew of Johnston's intentions has not been
determined.

      Bill Heller alluded to the fact that Boeing became preeminent by
emphasizing safety.  Were these safety issues exacerbated by a fatal design
error in the original DC10?  This defective design would lead to the 1974
crash of a Turkish Airlines DC10 after takeoff near Paris, France.  There
were no survivors.  The design flaw surfaced because the aft cargo door was
not closed properly.  No fool proof method existed for the ground crew to
determine whether the cargo door was closed for flight.  As the DC10 ascended
after takeoff, pressurization of the cabin forced the cargo door open.  The
resulting explosive depressurization caused the cabin floor to collapse onto
the horizontal and vertical control cables.  At this point the control cables
were rendered useless and an uncontrolled descent into the ground was
imminent.  Warning signs of this impending catastrophe were provided, but
timely and appropriate action was not taken.

      Some time the merger of McDonnell and Douglas, the DC10 would be
renamed the MD11.  As far as I know there are no plans to continue production
of the DC10/MD11.          

      I am unaware of any Boeing commercial jet liner that crashed due to a
design flaw.  Recent investigations of Boeing 737 and 747 crashes have been
inconclusive as to cause.  

      Bill Heller, with your vast flying experience, I welcome any comments
you may have concerning the relative safety of Boeing and McDonnell-Douglas
aircraft.  Also, if anyone has any comments concerning the durability of the
B17 I would welcome them as well.

      What I state here is meant to result in an open discussion.  No
offense is intended.  
 
Best Wishes,
             
John A. Jenkins

6910 Old Redmond Road
Redmond, WA   98052   USA

Phone (425) 885-0595 --part1_60.1193f9a5.28949a63_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sun Jul 29 05:52:36 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2001 00:52:36 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Some Loose Ends, Boeing, and McDonnell-Douglas Message-ID: <3d.f15e7d3.2894f094@aol.com> great that you give of your vast experiences with aircraft and thanks. spec From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sun Jul 29 07:11:57 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2001 02:11:57 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Some Loose Ends, Boeing, and McDonnell-Douglas Message-ID: <126.220087f.2895032d@aol.com> It seemed to me the Douglas B17's were finished up just a bit nicer than the Boeings. At least they had a prettier wheel. I think I liked to fly the Boeings better but I would be hard pressed to say why. I liked them both better than the Vega's It is sad to me that Douglas is not still building airplanes. They built some great ones. Jack Rencher From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sun Jul 29 19:09:15 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2001 14:09:15 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Some Loose Ends, Boeing, and McDonnell-Douglas Message-ID: <106.34bd815.2895ab4b@cs.com> --part1_106.34bd815.2895ab4b_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Spec, When I first came to Boeing in the late 1970s there were people that I knew who had been with the Boeing Company since the late 1940s. I am certain that there were others around who worked on the B17 Program, but I never met any. All of these people have long since retired. In 1985 there was quite a celebration in Seattle for the 50th Anniversary of the B17. The Boeing Company was involved with many events and veterans from WWII units including the 303rd BG participated. Best Wishes, John A. Jenkins 6910 Old Redmond Road Redmond, WA 98052 USA Phone (425) 885-0595 --part1_106.34bd815.2895ab4b_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Spec,
      When I first came to Boeing in the late 1970s there were people that I
knew who had been with the Boeing Company since the late 1940s.  I am certain
that there were others around who worked on the B17 Program, but I never met
any.  All of these people have long since retired.
      In 1985 there was quite a celebration in Seattle for the 50th
Anniversary of the B17.  The Boeing Company was involved with many events and
veterans from WWII units including the 303rd BG participated.  

Best Wishes,  

John A. Jenkins

6910 Old Redmond Road
Redmond, WA   98052   USA

Phone (425) 885-0595 --part1_106.34bd815.2895ab4b_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sun Jul 29 20:58:28 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (William Heller) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2001 12:58:28 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Some Loose Ends, Boeing, and McDonnell-Douglas References: <106.34bd815.2895ab4b@cs.com> Message-ID: <3B646AE3.DB8C94D6@attglobal.net> --------------247C0C03A8EA3C980AC80F45 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit J. Jenkins ... Did you ever know Test Pilot, Harley Beard? Cheers! Bill Heller JJENKINSR@cs.com wrote: > Spec, > When I first came to Boeing in the late 1970s there were people > that I > knew who had been with the Boeing Company since the late 1940s. I am > certain > that there were others around who worked on the B17 Program, but I > never met > any. All of these people have long since retired. > In 1985 there was quite a celebration in Seattle for the 50th > Anniversary of the B17. The Boeing Company was involved with many > events and > veterans from WWII units including the 303rd BG participated. > > Best Wishes, > > John A. Jenkins > > 6910 Old Redmond Road > Redmond, WA 98052 USA > > Phone (425) 885-0595 --------------247C0C03A8EA3C980AC80F45 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit J. Jenkins ...

Did you ever know Test Pilot, Harley Beard?

Cheers!

Bill Heller

JJENKINSR@cs.com wrote:

Spec,
      When I first came to Boeing in the late 1970s there were people that I
knew who had been with the Boeing Company since the late 1940s.  I am certain
that there were others around who worked on the B17 Program, but I never met
any.  All of these people have long since retired.
      In 1985 there was quite a celebration in Seattle for the 50th
Anniversary of the B17.  The Boeing Company was involved with many events and
veterans from WWII units including the 303rd BG participated.

Best Wishes,

John A. Jenkins

6910 Old Redmond Road
Redmond, WA   98052   USA

Phone (425) 885-0595

--------------247C0C03A8EA3C980AC80F45-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Jul 30 00:07:49 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2001 19:07:49 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Some Loose Ends, Boeing, and McDonnell-Douglas Message-ID: <9d.18ec2266.2895f145@aol.com> --part1_9d.18ec2266.2895f145_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Yes Bill, that reunion sponsored by Boeing in Seattle on the 50th B17 anniversary was great, it was my first and I don't think any since has equalled it. Bob Finley --part1_9d.18ec2266.2895f145_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Yes Bill, that reunion sponsored by Boeing in Seattle on the 50th B17
anniversary was great, it was my first and I don't think any since has
equalled it.
                                                                        Bob
Finley --part1_9d.18ec2266.2895f145_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Jul 30 00:09:15 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2001 19:09:15 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Some Loose Ends, Boeing, and McDonnell-Douglas Message-ID: <18.100516bd.2895f19b@aol.com> --part1_18.100516bd.2895f19b_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sorry John, I think I typed "Bill" in error. Bob F --part1_18.100516bd.2895f19b_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sorry John, I think I typed "Bill" in error. Bob F --part1_18.100516bd.2895f19b_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Jul 30 01:23:51 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Bill Owen) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2001 19:23:51 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Fw: Origin of Taps Message-ID: <002201c1188d$e94a4aa0$303f22d1@billowen> I had never heard this story before. I think the group might find it interesting. Cheers, Bill Owen ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Owen" Subject: Origin of Taps > > > > We have all heard the haunting song, "TAPS." It's the song that gives us > > that lump in our throats and usually creates tears in our eyes. But, do > > you know the story behind the song? If not, I think you will be pleased > > to find out about it's humble beginnings. > > Reportedly, it all began in 1862 during the Civil War, when Union Army > > Captain Robert Ellicombe was with his men near Harrison's Landing in > > Virginia. > > The Confederate Army was on the other side of the narrow strip of land. > > During the night, Captain Ellicombe heard the moans of a soldier who lay > > severely wounded on the field. Not knowing if it was a Union or > > Confederate soldier, the Captain decided to risk his life and bring the > > stricken man back for medical attention. > > Crawling on his stomach through the gunfire, the Captain reached the > > stricken soldier and began pulling him toward his encampment. When the > > Captain finally reached his own lines, he discovered it was actually a > > Confederate soldier, but the soldier was dead. The Captain lit a lantern > > and suddenly caught his breath and went numb with shock. In the dim > > light, he saw the face of the soldier. It was his own son. The boy had > > been studying music in the South when the war broke out. Without telling > > his father, the boy enlisted in the Confederate Army. > > The following morning, heartbroken, the father asked permission of his > > superiors to give his son a full military burial despite his enemy > > status. His request was only partially granted. The Captain had asked if > > he could have a group of Army band members play a funeral dirge for his > > son at the funeral. > > The request was turned down since the soldier was a Confederate. But, > > out of respect for the father, they did say they could give him only one > > musician. > > The Captain chose a bugler. He asked the bugler to play a series of > > musical notes he had found on a piece of paper in the pocket of the dead > > youth's uniform. This wish was granted. The haunting melody, we now know > > as "taps" used at military funerals, was born. > > > > Day is done > > Gone the sun > > From the lakes > > From the hills > > From the sky. > > All is well, > > Safely rest. > > God is nigh. > > Fading light > > Dims the sight > > And a star > > Gems the sky, > > Gleaming bright > > From afar, > > Drawing nigh, > > Falls the night. > > Thanks and praise, > > For our days, > > Neath the sun, > > Neath the stars, > > As we go, > > This we know, > > God is nigh. > > > > > > > > From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Jul 31 18:38:06 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 13:38:06 EDT Subject: [303rd-Talk] Some Loose Ends, Boeing, and McDonnell-Douglas Message-ID: <12e.23428e9.289846fe@aol.com> how about the current location move. spec