Subject: RE: [303rd-Talk] 0.5 ammo markings

I can't help you with the sequence question but at th= e
303rd B.G, 360th Sqd, the tracers were removed from the
belts ear= ly in 1945. Reason, their trajectory was not
true and to many were sig= hting with tracers and not
sights......Bill Runnels
> I understa= nd that ammo belts were arranged in a certain sequence. Such as,> the 5th round was a tracer. Based on the different bullet typ= es below, what
> was the normal sequence of rounds? Did it di= ffer by theater? That is, in
> the PTO the Japanese plane arm= or was possibly different than the German.
> Was there a difference= in how far each type could travel?
>
> Dave
>
><= BR>> -----Original Message-----
> From: VONDRA BURRELL [SMTP:lvb= url6@msn.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 6:58 PM
> T= o: Bomb Group
> Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] 0.5 ammo markings
>=
> Ray, yes silver is armour piercing incendiary or API. = ; Black is AP,
> Blue is straight incendiary, red is tracer. There = is now a sliver and red
> which is APIT, I don't think it was aroun= d in WWII.   Lance
>
>
> ----- Original Messa= ge -----
> From: ray cossey
> Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 20= 01 4:04 PM
> To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com
> Subject: Re: [303r= d-Talk] 0.5 ammo markings
>
> Vondra Burrell
>
> = The color of the tip of the 0.5 has long disappeared as a
> result = of over zealous cleaning by our lady cleaner. I seem to recall that
&g= t; it was perhaps silver? Was there such a tip coloring?
>> Regards
>
> Ray Cossey
>
>

------=_NextPart_001_0000_01C1631D.21F832C0-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Nov 2 03:12:21 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2001 22:12:21 EST Subject: [303rd-Talk] Merlin Miller Message-ID: --part1_a4.1b95f89c.29136915_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sorry guys, I forgot to give you Merlin Miller's email address. It's merlinmiller@yahoo.com. Terry Lucas --part1_a4.1b95f89c.29136915_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit            Sorry guys, I forgot to give you Merlin Miller's email address. It's merlinmiller@yahoo.com.
Terry Lucas --part1_a4.1b95f89c.29136915_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Nov 2 14:24:38 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Bill Owen) Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 08:24:38 -0600 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Fw: B-17 Web Site... Message-ID: <000901c163aa$1f515aa0$5568db40@billowen> Subject: B-17 Web Site > http://www.ratol.fi/~tmannine/b-17/ > > > Saw this site of B-17 info and thought I would pass it on to you.... Best wishes, Bill From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Nov 2 16:14:48 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 10:14:48 -0600 Subject: [303rd-Talk] RAF Slang Message-ID: Just found this tucked away on in my computer. I'd forgotten all about it.SHORT GLOSSARY OF RAF SLANG Balbo, A A large formation of aircraft Bale out To take to one's parachute Bind, A People who obstruct one Black, A Something badly done, a "bad show" Blitz, A solid lump of Large formation of enemy aircraft Blonde job, A Young woman with fair hair Bogus Sham, spurious Bomphleteers Airmen engaged on the early pamphlet raids Brassed off Diminutive of "browned off" Brolly Parachute Browned off, To be "Fed up" Bumps and Circuits Circuits and landings Bus driver A bomber pilot Buttoned up A job properly completed, "mastered" Completely Cheesed No hope at all Cope To accomplish, to deal with Crabbing along Flying near the ground or water Deck, Crack down on To "pancake" an aircraft Dog fight Aerial scrap Drill, The right Correct method of doing anything Drink, In the To come down into the sea Dud Applied to weather when unfit to fly Duff gen Dud information Dust bin Rear gunner's lower position in aircraft Erk, An A beginner in any job Fan The propeller Flak Anti-aircraft fire Flap A disturbance, general excitement Fox, To To do something clever or rather cunning Gen (pron jen) General information of any kind whatever George The automatic pilot Get Cracking Get going Gong, To collect a To get a medal Greenhouse Cockpit cover Hedge-hopping Flying so low that the aircraft appears to hop over the hedges Hurryback A Hurricane fighter Jink away Sharp manoeuvre Sudden evasive action of aircraft Kipper Kite Coastal Command Aircraft which convoy fishing fleets in the North and Irish Seas Kite An aeroplane Laid on, To have To produce anything, such as supplies Mae West Life-saving stole, or waistcoat, inflated if wearer falls into sea Mickey Mouse Bomb-dropping mechanism Muscle in To take advantage of a good thing Office Cockpit of aircraft Organize To "win" a wanted article Pack up Cease to function Peel off, To Break formation to engage enemy Play pussy Hide in the clouds Pleep A squeak, rather like a high note klaxon Plug away Continue to fire Keep after target Pukka gen Accurate information Pulpit Cockpit of aircraft Quick squirt Short sharp burst of machine-gun fire Quickie Short for above Rang the bell Got good results Rings Rank designation on officer's cuffs Ropey Uncomplimentary adjective "A ropey Landing", "A ropey type", "A ropey evening", etc Screamed downhill Executed a power dive Shooting a line Exaggerated talk, generally about one's own prowess Shot Down in Flames Crossed in love Severe reprimand Snake about Operational aerobatics Spun in A bad mistake Analogy from an aircraft spinning out of control into the ground Stationmaster Commanding Officer of Station Stooge Deputy, ie second pilot or any assistant Stooging about Delayed landing for various reasons Flying slowly over an area Patrolling Synthetic Not the real thing Also applied to ground training Tail End Charlie Rear gunner in large bombing aircraft or rear aircraft of a formation Tear off a strip To reprimand, take down a peg Tee up To prepare a job, to get ready Touch bottom Crash Toys A great deal of training equipment is termed toys Train, Driving the Leading more than one squadron into battle Type Classification - usually referring to people Good, Bad, Ropey, Poor type View RAF personnel always take a "view" of things Good view, Poor view, Dim view, Long distance view, Lean view, Outside view, "Ropey" view Wizard Really first class, superlative, attractive, ingenious _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Nov 2 17:51:37 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Mike McClanahan) Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 10:51:37 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Cold weather flying gear Message-ID: <3BE2DD29.86DE7F1@qwest.net> Hi all- Re the current discussions on cold weather flying, I have a question or two. As usual, I'm particularly interested in the conditions in the 8AF B-17s in early '43, but all input is helpful and welcome. I know the waist gunners were decked out in as much protective gear as possible (B-10 suits, gloves or mittens, winter boots, B-2 caps, electric suits, etc.). How much of this gear was worn by other crewmembers? I suspect the tail gunner was pretty well decked out, but how about the BTG and RO? Was there enough heat in the radio room to offer any help? Would all that gear fit into the ball turret? Was there any heat in the BT? On the flight deck and in the nose compartment, similar question. Were those areas well enough heated to allow lighter clothing? It seems to me that in most photos, the five guys in front are less heavily dressed than their comrades from the rear of the plane. Were the A-2 and B-3 jackets with unheated long johns and flight boots sufficient in the forward areas? Did the front-end guys ever wear the electric F-1 "bunny suits" or shearling trousers? Thanks for your input. Mike McClanahan From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Nov 2 19:52:53 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (William Heller) Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 11:52:53 -0800 Subject: [303rd-Talk] RAF Slang References: Message-ID: <3BE2F995.C403F413@attglobal.net> KP ... Do not forget the phrase ... "Bob's your Uncle." Cheers! WCH Kevin Pearson wrote: > Just found this tucked away on in my computer. I'd forgotten all about > it.SHORT GLOSSARY OF RAF SLANG > > Balbo, A A large formation of aircraft > Bale out To take to one's parachute > Bind, A People who obstruct one > Black, A Something badly done, a "bad show" > Blitz, A solid lump of Large formation of enemy aircraft > Blonde job, A Young woman with fair hair > Bogus Sham, spurious > Bomphleteers Airmen engaged on the early pamphlet raids > Brassed off Diminutive of "browned off" > Brolly Parachute > Browned off, To be "Fed up" > Bumps and Circuits Circuits and landings > Bus driver A bomber pilot > Buttoned up A job properly completed, "mastered" > Completely Cheesed No hope at all > Cope To accomplish, to deal with > Crabbing along Flying near the ground or water > Deck, Crack down on To "pancake" an aircraft > Dog fight Aerial scrap > Drill, The right Correct method of doing anything > Drink, In the To come down into the sea > Dud Applied to weather when unfit to fly > Duff gen Dud information > Dust bin Rear gunner's lower position in aircraft > Erk, An A beginner in any job > Fan The propeller > Flak Anti-aircraft fire > Flap A disturbance, general excitement > Fox, To To do something clever or rather cunning > Gen (pron jen) General information of any kind whatever > George The automatic pilot > Get Cracking Get going > Gong, To collect a To get a medal > Greenhouse Cockpit cover > Hedge-hopping Flying so low that the aircraft appears to > hop over the hedges > Hurryback A Hurricane fighter > Jink away Sharp manoeuvre Sudden evasive action of > aircraft > Kipper Kite Coastal Command Aircraft which convoy > fishing fleets in the North and Irish Seas > Kite An aeroplane > Laid on, To have To produce anything, such as supplies > Mae West Life-saving stole, or waistcoat, inflated if > wearer falls into sea > Mickey Mouse Bomb-dropping mechanism > Muscle in To take advantage of a good thing > Office Cockpit of aircraft > Organize To "win" a wanted article > Pack up Cease to function > Peel off, To Break formation to engage enemy > Play pussy Hide in the clouds > Pleep A squeak, rather like a high note klaxon > Plug away Continue to fire Keep after target > Pukka gen Accurate information > Pulpit Cockpit of aircraft > Quick squirt Short sharp burst of machine-gun fire > Quickie Short for above > Rang the bell Got good results > Rings Rank designation on officer's cuffs > Ropey Uncomplimentary adjective "A ropey > Landing", "A ropey type", "A ropey > evening", etc > Screamed downhill Executed a power dive > Shooting a line Exaggerated talk, generally about one's > own prowess > Shot Down in Flames Crossed in love Severe reprimand > Snake about Operational aerobatics > Spun in A bad mistake Analogy from an aircraft > spinning out of control into the ground > Stationmaster Commanding Officer of Station > Stooge Deputy, ie second pilot or any assistant > Stooging about Delayed landing for various reasons Flying > slowly over an area Patrolling > Synthetic Not the real thing Also applied to ground > training > Tail End Charlie Rear gunner in large bombing aircraft or > rear aircraft of a formation > Tear off a strip To reprimand, take down a peg > Tee up To prepare a job, to get ready > Touch bottom Crash > Toys A great deal of training equipment is > termed toys > Train, Driving the Leading more than one squadron into battle > Type Classification - usually referring to > people Good, Bad, Ropey, Poor type > View RAF personnel always take a "view" of > things Good view, Poor view, Dim view, Long > distance view, Lean view, Outside > view, "Ropey" view > Wizard Really first class, superlative, attractive, > ingenious > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Nov 2 20:19:35 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 20:19:35 +0000 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Cold weather flying gear Message-ID: <20011102201936.ONMU11294.mtiwmhc25.worldnet.att.net@webmail.worldnet.att.net> Mike, for all practical purposes there was no heat in the B-17. I seem to recall that the flight deck received a little from the #3 engine. We all wore the electrical heated suites, gloves etc. The nose thermometer would register as low as -65 C. Frost bite and loss of oxygen were top concerns on a mission. At altitude we completed an oxygen check every few minutes.with each crew member. Bill Runnels, bombardier From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Fri Nov 2 22:22:06 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 17:22:06 EST Subject: [303rd-Talk] Cold weather flying gear Message-ID: <32.1d439eb1.2914768e@aol.com> yup!!! bill you are a survivor of those checks. cheers. spec From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sat Nov 3 20:25:57 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Mike McClanahan) Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2001 13:25:57 -0700 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear References: <0.10005332.645034485-738719082-1004726358@topica.com> <000e01c163f0$9501ab60$bb790918@phnx3.az.home.com> Message-ID: <3BE452D5.A1BE72EC@qwest.net> Hi Jim and Bills- Thanks for taking the time to reply to my post. Your comments are very helpful and confirm my personal observations from the B-17 flight I took this summer. I was struck by the size of the gaps around the bomb bay doors and the ball turret and wondered why something wasn't done to address them. I guess the designers never had to fly in the planes and experience how cold it could get for themselves. I've had several good responses to my post and it seems that while all the gunners dressed in as much cold weather gear as they could, the pilots and navigator and bombardier had quite a bit of variability. Some have told me that long johns and A-2s were enough while others, especially navs and bombardiers, have said they put on as much as they could. I suppose each person had his own level of tolerance for the tradeoff between warmth and mobility. Thanks again for your help, Mike McClanahan From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sat Nov 3 21:06:52 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (William Heller) Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2001 13:06:52 -0800 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear References: <0.10005332.645034485-738719082-1004726358@topica.com> <000e01c163f0$9501ab60$bb790918@phnx3.az.home.com> <3BE452D5.A1BE72EC@qwest.net> Message-ID: <3BE45C6B.5636AB94@attglobal.net> Mike ... et al ... The gaps where the bomb bay doors fit to the fuselage and other various "non fits" are of no consequence when one considers that the waist windows where the waist gunners operated, were open, as was the roof of the radio room from whence the radio gunner operated. The B17s were not built as airliners but for combat and speed of production was quite of the essence. Any "comfort" desired was done by the manner in which you dressed for the position in which you were flying. In fact, comfort was not a concern. We were in war and had the best equipment possible at the time. Some of the concerns I hear are what make me wonder if today's people truly understood what the hell was going on ... WE WERE AT WAR... AND, we WON ! .... we have not won one since! This should tell us something. Cheers! WCH Mike McClanahan wrote: > Hi Jim and Bills- > > Thanks for taking the time to reply to my post. Your comments are very > helpful and confirm my personal observations from the B-17 flight I took > this summer. I was struck by the size of the gaps around the bomb bay > doors and the ball turret and wondered why something wasn't done to > address them. I guess the designers never had to fly in the planes and > experience how cold it could get for themselves. > > I've had several good responses to my post and it seems that while all > the gunners dressed in as much cold weather gear as they could, the > pilots and navigator and bombardier had quite a bit of variability. > Some have told me that long johns and A-2s were enough while others, > especially navs and bombardiers, have said they put on as much as they > could. I suppose each person had his own level of tolerance for the > tradeoff between warmth and mobility. > > Thanks again for your help, > > Mike McClanahan From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sat Nov 3 21:37:53 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2001 15:37:53 -0600 Subject: [303rd-Talk] RAF Slang Message-ID: BH: What does "Bob's your uncle" mean? Kevin >From: William Heller >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] RAF Slang >Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 11:52:53 -0800 > >KP ... > >Do not forget the phrase ... "Bob's your Uncle." > >Cheers! > >WCH > >Kevin Pearson wrote: > > > Just found this tucked away on in my computer. I'd forgotten all about > > it.SHORT GLOSSARY OF RAF SLANG > > > > Balbo, A A large formation of aircraft > > Bale out To take to one's parachute > > Bind, A People who obstruct one > > Black, A Something badly done, a "bad show" > > Blitz, A solid lump of Large formation of enemy aircraft > > Blonde job, A Young woman with fair hair > > Bogus Sham, spurious > > Bomphleteers Airmen engaged on the early pamphlet raids > > Brassed off Diminutive of "browned off" > > Brolly Parachute > > Browned off, To be "Fed up" > > Bumps and Circuits Circuits and landings > > Bus driver A bomber pilot > > Buttoned up A job properly completed, "mastered" > > Completely Cheesed No hope at all > > Cope To accomplish, to deal with > > Crabbing along Flying near the ground or water > > Deck, Crack down on To "pancake" an aircraft > > Dog fight Aerial scrap > > Drill, The right Correct method of doing anything > > Drink, In the To come down into the sea > > Dud Applied to weather when unfit to fly > > Duff gen Dud information > > Dust bin Rear gunner's lower position in aircraft > > Erk, An A beginner in any job > > Fan The propeller > > Flak Anti-aircraft fire > > Flap A disturbance, general excitement > > Fox, To To do something clever or rather cunning > > Gen (pron jen) General information of any kind whatever > > George The automatic pilot > > Get Cracking Get going > > Gong, To collect a To get a medal > > Greenhouse Cockpit cover > > Hedge-hopping Flying so low that the aircraft appears to > > hop over the hedges > > Hurryback A Hurricane fighter > > Jink away Sharp manoeuvre Sudden evasive action of > > aircraft > > Kipper Kite Coastal Command Aircraft which convoy > > fishing fleets in the >North and Irish Seas > > Kite An aeroplane > > Laid on, To have To produce anything, such as supplies > > Mae West Life-saving stole, or waistcoat, >inflated if > > wearer falls into sea > > Mickey Mouse Bomb-dropping mechanism > > Muscle in To take advantage of a good thing > > Office Cockpit of aircraft > > Organize To "win" a wanted article > > Pack up Cease to function > > Peel off, To Break formation to engage enemy > > Play pussy Hide in the clouds > > Pleep A squeak, rather like a high note klaxon > > Plug away Continue to fire Keep after target > > Pukka gen Accurate information > > Pulpit Cockpit of aircraft > > Quick squirt Short sharp burst of machine-gun fire > > Quickie Short for above > > Rang the bell Got good results > > Rings Rank designation on officer's cuffs > > Ropey Uncomplimentary adjective "A ropey > > Landing", "A ropey >type", "A ropey > > evening", etc > > Screamed downhill Executed a power dive > > Shooting a line Exaggerated talk, generally about one's > > own prowess > > Shot Down in Flames Crossed in love Severe reprimand > > Snake about Operational aerobatics > > Spun in A bad mistake Analogy from an aircraft > > spinning out of control >into the ground > > Stationmaster Commanding Officer of Station > > Stooge Deputy, ie second pilot or any assistant > > Stooging about Delayed landing for various reasons >Flying > > slowly over an area >Patrolling > > Synthetic Not the real thing Also applied to >ground > > training > > Tail End Charlie Rear gunner in large bombing aircraft or > > rear aircraft of a >formation > > Tear off a strip To reprimand, take down a peg > > Tee up To prepare a job, to get ready > > Touch bottom Crash > > Toys A great deal of training equipment is > > termed toys > > Train, Driving the Leading more than one squadron into >battle > > Type Classification - usually referring to > > people Good, Bad, Ropey, >Poor type > > View RAF personnel always take a "view" of > > things Good view, Poor >view, Dim view, Long > > distance view, Lean >view, Outside > > view, "Ropey" view > > Wizard Really first class, superlative, >attractive, > > ingenious > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > 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 Sat Nov 3 21:45:51 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2001 15:45:51 -0600 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear Message-ID: My good friend Lou LaHood from the 91st BG said he had heat in his B-17G, s/n 42-31673, in the cockpit. And that he wore long johns, and several other layers of cloths, but did not wear a heavy coat, only his A-2. He was in the ETO from Jan. to May 44. Given how drafty those old birds were, I don't see how the heat could have done much good, especially at altitude. But given the level of combat, maybe the heart pumped a little faster and kept a guy a bit warmer than if he was not flying combat. The other thing I can't stand about the remake of Memphis Belle is how the pilot and copilot are wearing their 50 mission crush caps on the mission. Incredible! Hollywood did it again. (But I still love to see Fortresses in flight, even if it's in a bad movie.) Kevin >From: William Heller >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear >Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2001 13:06:52 -0800 > >Mike ... et al ... > >The gaps where the bomb bay doors fit to the fuselage and other various >"non fits" are of no consequence when one considers that the waist windows >where the waist gunners operated, were open, as was the roof of the radio >room from whence the radio gunner operated. > >The B17s were not built as airliners but for combat and speed of production >was quite of the essence. > >Any "comfort" desired was done by the manner in which you dressed for the >position in which you were flying. In fact, comfort was not a concern. We >were in war and had the best equipment possible at the time. Some of the >concerns I hear are what make me wonder if today's people truly understood >what the hell was going on ... WE WERE AT WAR... AND, we WON ! .... we >have not won one since! > >This should tell us something. > >Cheers! > >WCH > >Mike McClanahan wrote: > > > Hi Jim and Bills- > > > > Thanks for taking the time to reply to my post. Your comments are very > > helpful and confirm my personal observations from the B-17 flight I took > > this summer. I was struck by the size of the gaps around the bomb bay > > doors and the ball turret and wondered why something wasn't done to > > address them. I guess the designers never had to fly in the planes and > > experience how cold it could get for themselves. > > > > I've had several good responses to my post and it seems that while all > > the gunners dressed in as much cold weather gear as they could, the > > pilots and navigator and bombardier had quite a bit of variability. > > Some have told me that long johns and A-2s were enough while others, > > especially navs and bombardiers, have said they put on as much as they > > could. I suppose each person had his own level of tolerance for the > > tradeoff between warmth and mobility. > > > > Thanks again for your help, > > > > Mike McClanahan > > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sat Nov 3 23:54:16 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Dick Smith) Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2001 15:54:16 -0800 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear References: Message-ID: <000501c164c2$dc248b20$3af833cf@richards> Hi Kevin: You were wondering where Spider was ,well I'm back from seeing my Kids in Prescott Az. . The heaters on our B17 G's was disconnected in the cockpit because the heaters used Ethylene Glycol the same as Auto heaters to transfer the heat to the cockpit . We were told they removed them because of the fire danger from the Ethylene Glycol. As for fighter tours they were based on hours flown ,not on Missions. I was in the First Scouting Force where we flew until they thought we had enough. There is a great web site on all the fighter groups and the scouting forces at Try it out. Good Luck Spider Smith ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin Pearson" To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2001 1:45 PM Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear > My good friend Lou LaHood from the 91st BG said he had heat in his B-17G, > s/n 42-31673, in the cockpit. And that he wore long johns, and several > other layers of cloths, but did not wear a heavy coat, only his A-2. He was > in the ETO from Jan. to May 44. Given how drafty those old birds were, I > don't see how the heat could have done much good, especially at altitude. > But given the level of combat, maybe the heart pumped a little faster and > kept a guy a bit warmer than if he was not flying combat. The other thing I > can't stand about the remake of Memphis Belle is how the pilot and copilot > are wearing their 50 mission crush caps on the mission. Incredible! > Hollywood did it again. (But I still love to see Fortresses in flight, even > if it's in a bad movie.) > Kevin > > > >From: William Heller > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear > >Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2001 13:06:52 -0800 > > > >Mike ... et al ... > > > >The gaps where the bomb bay doors fit to the fuselage and other various > >"non fits" are of no consequence when one considers that the waist windows > >where the waist gunners operated, were open, as was the roof of the radio > >room from whence the radio gunner operated. > > > >The B17s were not built as airliners but for combat and speed of production > >was quite of the essence. > > > >Any "comfort" desired was done by the manner in which you dressed for the > >position in which you were flying. In fact, comfort was not a concern. We > >were in war and had the best equipment possible at the time. Some of the > >concerns I hear are what make me wonder if today's people truly understood > >what the hell was going on ... WE WERE AT WAR... AND, we WON ! .... we > >have not won one since! > > > >This should tell us something. > > > >Cheers! > > > >WCH > > > >Mike McClanahan wrote: > > > > > Hi Jim and Bills- > > > > > > Thanks for taking the time to reply to my post. Your comments are very > > > helpful and confirm my personal observations from the B-17 flight I took > > > this summer. I was struck by the size of the gaps around the bomb bay > > > doors and the ball turret and wondered why something wasn't done to > > > address them. I guess the designers never had to fly in the planes and > > > experience how cold it could get for themselves. > > > > > > I've had several good responses to my post and it seems that while all > > > the gunners dressed in as much cold weather gear as they could, the > > > pilots and navigator and bombardier had quite a bit of variability. > > > Some have told me that long johns and A-2s were enough while others, > > > especially navs and bombardiers, have said they put on as much as they > > > could. I suppose each person had his own level of tolerance for the > > > tradeoff between warmth and mobility. > > > > > > Thanks again for your help, > > > > > > Mike McClanahan > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sun Nov 4 00:13:04 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2001 19:13:04 EST Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear Message-ID: <78.1d263c34.2915e210@aol.com> --part1_78.1d263c34.2915e210_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In response to your question about heat in the B17 I was a pilot in the 358 and flew 28 missions and I dont remember any heat in the cockpit but we did have heated suits. And I wore my "crush" all the time to let the earphones do their work. My co-pilot put his suit on and got in the plane to await start time and turned the suit up to 10 and took a "short "nap and came up clawing for dear life - he never wore the electric suit again - only sheepskin! I still get a laugh out of that! Clyde Henning Pilot. --part1_78.1d263c34.2915e210_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In response to your question about heat in the B17 I was a pilot in the 358 and flew 28 missions and I dont remember any heat in the cockpit but we did have heated suits. And I wore my "crush" all the time to let the earphones do their work. My co-pilot put his suit on and got in the plane to await start time and turned the suit up to 10 and took a "short "nap and came up clawing for dear life - he never wore the electric suit again - only sheepskin! I still get a laugh out of that!
                   Clyde Henning   Pilot. --part1_78.1d263c34.2915e210_boundary-- From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Sun Nov 4 09:21:51 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (William Heller) Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2001 01:21:51 -0800 Subject: [303rd-Talk] RAF Slang References: Message-ID: <3BE508AF.414316C@attglobal.net> Kevin ... It is a phrase much like "And everything's okay" .... For example a Brit might say, "When you go into the breakfast room you'll see your table laid on immediately to your right. Sit down and wait for your waiter and Bob's your Uncle. When he says "Bob's your Uncle" he means "and then everything's okay" or a thought to that effect. It's a funny phrase, but I learned to UNDERSTAND it AND use it. Cheers! WCH Kevin Pearson wrote: > BH: What does "Bob's your uncle" mean? Kevin > > >From: William Heller > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] RAF Slang > >Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 11:52:53 -0800 > > > >KP ... > > > >Do not forget the phrase ... "Bob's your Uncle." > > > >Cheers! > > > >WCH > > > >Kevin Pearson wrote: > > > > > Just found this tucked away on in my computer. I'd forgotten all about > > > it.SHORT GLOSSARY OF RAF SLANG > > > > > > Balbo, A A large formation of aircraft > > > Bale out To take to one's parachute > > > Bind, A People who obstruct one > > > Black, A Something badly done, a "bad show" > > > Blitz, A solid lump of Large formation of enemy aircraft > > > Blonde job, A Young woman with fair hair > > > Bogus Sham, spurious > > > Bomphleteers Airmen engaged on the early pamphlet raids > > > Brassed off Diminutive of "browned off" > > > Brolly Parachute > > > Browned off, To be "Fed up" > > > Bumps and Circuits Circuits and landings > > > Bus driver A bomber pilot > > > Buttoned up A job properly completed, "mastered" > > > Completely Cheesed No hope at all > > > Cope To accomplish, to deal with > > > Crabbing along Flying near the ground or water > > > Deck, Crack down on To "pancake" an aircraft > > > Dog fight Aerial scrap > > > Drill, The right Correct method of doing anything > > > Drink, In the To come down into the sea > > > Dud Applied to weather when unfit to fly > > > Duff gen Dud information > > > Dust bin Rear gunner's lower position in aircraft > > > Erk, An A beginner in any job > > > Fan The propeller > > > Flak Anti-aircraft fire > > > Flap A disturbance, general excitement > > > Fox, To To do something clever or rather cunning > > > Gen (pron jen) General information of any kind whatever > > > George The automatic pilot > > > Get Cracking Get going > > > Gong, To collect a To get a medal > > > Greenhouse Cockpit cover > > > Hedge-hopping Flying so low that the aircraft appears to > > > hop over the hedges > > > Hurryback A Hurricane fighter > > > Jink away Sharp manoeuvre Sudden evasive action of > > > aircraft > > > Kipper Kite Coastal Command Aircraft which convoy > > > fishing fleets in the > >North and Irish Seas > > > Kite An aeroplane > > > Laid on, To have To produce anything, such as supplies > > > Mae West Life-saving stole, or waistcoat, > >inflated if > > > wearer falls into sea > > > Mickey Mouse Bomb-dropping mechanism > > > Muscle in To take advantage of a good thing > > > Office Cockpit of aircraft > > > Organize To "win" a wanted article > > > Pack up Cease to function > > > Peel off, To Break formation to engage enemy > > > Play pussy Hide in the clouds > > > Pleep A squeak, rather like a high note klaxon > > > Plug away Continue to fire Keep after target > > > Pukka gen Accurate information > > > Pulpit Cockpit of aircraft > > > Quick squirt Short sharp burst of machine-gun fire > > > Quickie Short for above > > > Rang the bell Got good results > > > Rings Rank designation on officer's cuffs > > > Ropey Uncomplimentary adjective "A ropey > > > Landing", "A ropey > >type", "A ropey > > > evening", etc > > > Screamed downhill Executed a power dive > > > Shooting a line Exaggerated talk, generally about one's > > > own prowess > > > Shot Down in Flames Crossed in love Severe reprimand > > > Snake about Operational aerobatics > > > Spun in A bad mistake Analogy from an aircraft > > > spinning out of control > >into the ground > > > Stationmaster Commanding Officer of Station > > > Stooge Deputy, ie second pilot or any assistant > > > Stooging about Delayed landing for various reasons > >Flying > > > slowly over an area > >Patrolling > > > Synthetic Not the real thing Also applied to > >ground > > > training > > > Tail End Charlie Rear gunner in large bombing aircraft or > > > rear aircraft of a > >formation > > > Tear off a strip To reprimand, take down a peg > > > Tee up To prepare a job, to get ready > > > Touch bottom Crash > > > Toys A great deal of training equipment is > > > termed toys > > > Train, Driving the Leading more than one squadron into > >battle > > > Type Classification - usually referring to > > > people Good, Bad, Ropey, > >Poor type > > > View RAF personnel always take a "view" of > > > things Good view, Poor > >view, Dim view, Long > > > distance view, Lean > >view, Outside > > > view, "Ropey" view > > > Wizard Really first class, superlative, > >attractive, > > > ingenious > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > 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 Nov 5 14:23:37 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2001 08:23:37 -0600 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear Message-ID: Spider, you're back! Great to have you back. Question: I got jumped all over by a B-24 chat group when I made a remark that 24s were prone to burning because of all the hydraulic fluid used to control many flight functions. One seemlingly very informed person wrote me a very detailed response which basically said the "flash point" of hydraulic fluid was so high it was theoretically impossible for the stuff to catch fire. What are the thoughts of this group? And since ethylene glycol must be mixed with water to work properly, is there really a danger of fire? I would doubt it, but as we have all seen, it wouldn't be the first time! Kevin >From: "Dick Smith" >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear >Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2001 15:54:16 -0800 > >Hi Kevin: > You were wondering where Spider was ,well I'm back from seeing my Kids in >Prescott Az. . > The heaters on our B17 G's was disconnected in the cockpit because the >heaters used Ethylene Glycol the same as Auto heaters to transfer the heat >to the cockpit . We were told they removed them because of the fire danger >from the Ethylene Glycol. > As for fighter tours they were based on hours flown ,not on Missions. I >was >in the First Scouting Force where we flew until they thought we had enough. >There is a great web site on all the fighter groups and the scouting forces >at Try it out. > Good Luck Spider Smith >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Kevin Pearson" >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> >Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2001 1:45 PM >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear > > > > My good friend Lou LaHood from the 91st BG said he had heat in his >B-17G, > > s/n 42-31673, in the cockpit. And that he wore long johns, and several > > other layers of cloths, but did not wear a heavy coat, only his A-2. He >was > > in the ETO from Jan. to May 44. Given how drafty those old birds were, >I > > don't see how the heat could have done much good, especially at >altitude. > > But given the level of combat, maybe the heart pumped a little faster >and > > kept a guy a bit warmer than if he was not flying combat. The other >thing >I > > can't stand about the remake of Memphis Belle is how the pilot and >copilot > > are wearing their 50 mission crush caps on the mission. Incredible! > > Hollywood did it again. (But I still love to see Fortresses in flight, >even > > if it's in a bad movie.) > > Kevin > > > > > > >From: William Heller > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear > > >Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2001 13:06:52 -0800 > > > > > >Mike ... et al ... > > > > > >The gaps where the bomb bay doors fit to the fuselage and other various > > >"non fits" are of no consequence when one considers that the waist >windows > > >where the waist gunners operated, were open, as was the roof of the >radio > > >room from whence the radio gunner operated. > > > > > >The B17s were not built as airliners but for combat and speed of >production > > >was quite of the essence. > > > > > >Any "comfort" desired was done by the manner in which you dressed for >the > > >position in which you were flying. In fact, comfort was not a concern. >We > > >were in war and had the best equipment possible at the time. Some of >the > > >concerns I hear are what make me wonder if today's people truly >understood > > >what the hell was going on ... WE WERE AT WAR... AND, we WON ! .... >we > > >have not won one since! > > > > > >This should tell us something. > > > > > >Cheers! > > > > > >WCH > > > > > >Mike McClanahan wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Jim and Bills- > > > > > > > > Thanks for taking the time to reply to my post. Your comments are >very > > > > helpful and confirm my personal observations from the B-17 flight I >took > > > > this summer. I was struck by the size of the gaps around the bomb >bay > > > > doors and the ball turret and wondered why something wasn't done to > > > > address them. I guess the designers never had to fly in the planes >and > > > > experience how cold it could get for themselves. > > > > > > > > I've had several good responses to my post and it seems that while >all > > > > the gunners dressed in as much cold weather gear as they could, the > > > > pilots and navigator and bombardier had quite a bit of variability. > > > > Some have told me that long johns and A-2s were enough while others, > > > > especially navs and bombardiers, have said they put on as much as >they > > > > could. I suppose each person had his own level of tolerance for the > > > > tradeoff between warmth and mobility. > > > > > > > > Thanks again for your help, > > > > > > > > Mike McClanahan > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > 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 Nov 5 16:26:09 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Tooley, Dave) Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2001 10:26:09 -0600 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Staying in touch with the rest of the world Message-ID: Hi list! After yesterdays stunning wins by the BEARS and the D-backs, I got to wondering. How did you stay in touch with what was going on in the rest of the world? How did you get home front news or know what was happening in the other theaters of op? I know that there were the two military publications, Yank and Stars and Stripes. But did everyone get them? How old was the news by the time you heard about it? Thanks! Dave From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Nov 5 22:08:46 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Bill Jones) Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2001 17:08:46 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear In-Reply-To: Message-ID: >...... Question: I got jumped all > over by a B-24 chat group when I made a remark that 24s were prone to > burning because of all the hydraulic fluid used to control many flight > functions. One seemlingly very informed person wrote me a very detailed > response which basically said the "flash point" of hydraulic fluid was so > high it was theoretically impossible for the stuff to catch fire. What are > the thoughts of this group? I think that this topic came up once before, and I think that one aspect was that there are at least 2 different types of hydraulic fluid used in aircraft, which have greatly different properties. However as part of my job, I used to perform field tests of items exposed to a variety of "typical" smokes that might be encountered in military situations, and one of the smokes was burning hydraulic fluid. To generate the smoke, we would pour out a pint or so of army issue hydraulic fluid into a big metal pan, similar to the lid of a trash can. We would then try to ignite it with a propane torch. It would burn, but it would generally require heating the edge of the puddle, where the metal meets the liquid, for often up to 5 minutes before it would catch fire, and then, it was about as vigorous as a candle. At 40 below temperatures, I don't think it would be very hazardous, but then they may have used a different formulation back then. And since ethylene glycol must be mixed with > water to work properly, is there really a danger of fire? I would doubt it, > but as we have all seen, it wouldn't be the first time! > Kevin > > > >From: "Dick Smith" > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear > >Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2001 15:54:16 -0800 > > > >Hi Kevin: > > You were wondering where Spider was ,well I'm back from seeing my Kids in > >Prescott Az. . > > The heaters on our B17 G's was disconnected in the cockpit because the > >heaters used Ethylene Glycol the same as Auto heaters to transfer the heat > >to the cockpit . We were told they removed them because of the fire danger > >from the Ethylene Glycol. > > As for fighter tours they were based on hours flown ,not on Missions. I > >was > >in the First Scouting Force where we flew until they thought we had enough. > >There is a great web site on all the fighter groups and the scouting forces > >at Try it out. > > Good Luck Spider Smith > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Kevin Pearson" > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > >Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2001 1:45 PM > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear > > > > > > > My good friend Lou LaHood from the 91st BG said he had heat in his > >B-17G, > > > s/n 42-31673, in the cockpit. And that he wore long johns, and several > > > other layers of cloths, but did not wear a heavy coat, only his A-2. He > >was > > > in the ETO from Jan. to May 44. Given how drafty those old birds were, > >I > > > don't see how the heat could have done much good, especially at > >altitude. > > > But given the level of combat, maybe the heart pumped a little faster > >and > > > kept a guy a bit warmer than if he was not flying combat. The other > >thing > >I > > > can't stand about the remake of Memphis Belle is how the pilot and > >copilot > > > are wearing their 50 mission crush caps on the mission. Incredible! > > > Hollywood did it again. (But I still love to see Fortresses in flight, > >even > > > if it's in a bad movie.) > > > Kevin > > > > > > > > > >From: William Heller > > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear > > > >Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2001 13:06:52 -0800 > > > > > > > >Mike ... et al ... > > > > > > > >The gaps where the bomb bay doors fit to the fuselage and other various > > > >"non fits" are of no consequence when one considers that the waist > >windows > > > >where the waist gunners operated, were open, as was the roof of the > >radio > > > >room from whence the radio gunner operated. > > > > > > > >The B17s were not built as airliners but for combat and speed of > >production > > > >was quite of the essence. > > > > > > > >Any "comfort" desired was done by the manner in which you dressed for > >the > > > >position in which you were flying. In fact, comfort was not a concern. > >We > > > >were in war and had the best equipment possible at the time. Some of > >the > > > >concerns I hear are what make me wonder if today's people truly > >understood > > > >what the hell was going on ... WE WERE AT WAR... AND, we WON ! .... > >we > > > >have not won one since! > > > > > > > >This should tell us something. > > > > > > > >Cheers! > > > > > > > >WCH > > > > > > > >Mike McClanahan wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Jim and Bills- > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for taking the time to reply to my post. Your comments are > >very > > > > > helpful and confirm my personal observations from the B-17 flight I > >took > > > > > this summer. I was struck by the size of the gaps around the bomb > >bay > > > > > doors and the ball turret and wondered why something wasn't done to > > > > > address them. I guess the designers never had to fly in the planes > >and > > > > > experience how cold it could get for themselves. > > > > > > > > > > I've had several good responses to my post and it seems that while > >all > > > > > the gunners dressed in as much cold weather gear as they could, the > > > > > pilots and navigator and bombardier had quite a bit of variability. > > > > > Some have told me that long johns and A-2s were enough while others, > > > > > especially navs and bombardiers, have said they put on as much as > >they > > > > > could. I suppose each person had his own level of tolerance for the > > > > > tradeoff between warmth and mobility. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks again for your help, > > > > > > > > > > Mike McClanahan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > 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 > > Bill Jones N3JLQ Sweden Maine wejones@megalink.net Main home page http://www.megalink.net/~wejones WWII/B-17 page http://www.megalink.net/~wejones/wwii.html From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Mon Nov 5 22:13:42 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Dick Smith) Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2001 14:13:42 -0800 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear References: Message-ID: <000801c16647$25cd3080$4df833cf@richards> Kevin: I don't know the flash point of the heater fluid . The reason for disabling the heaters was probably someone's stupidity but that's what we were told. As for electric suits we didn't wear them because they could get hot spots because of the wire used and they would give you bad burns. As for crew so of the Box The B17 Came In(B24) they were a fire trap anyway . We used to cheer when it was announced that they were going to the same target as we were ,because then we wouldn't see any German fighters because they would go after the boxes. Spider ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin Pearson" To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> Sent: Monday, November 05, 2001 6:23 AM Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear > Spider, you're back! Great to have you back. Question: I got jumped all > over by a B-24 chat group when I made a remark that 24s were prone to > burning because of all the hydraulic fluid used to control many flight > functions. One seemlingly very informed person wrote me a very detailed > response which basically said the "flash point" of hydraulic fluid was so > high it was theoretically impossible for the stuff to catch fire. What are > the thoughts of this group? And since ethylene glycol must be mixed with > water to work properly, is there really a danger of fire? I would doubt it, > but as we have all seen, it wouldn't be the first time! > Kevin > > > >From: "Dick Smith" > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear > >Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2001 15:54:16 -0800 > > > >Hi Kevin: > > You were wondering where Spider was ,well I'm back from seeing my Kids in > >Prescott Az. . > > The heaters on our B17 G's was disconnected in the cockpit because the > >heaters used Ethylene Glycol the same as Auto heaters to transfer the heat > >to the cockpit . We were told they removed them because of the fire danger > >from the Ethylene Glycol. > > As for fighter tours they were based on hours flown ,not on Missions. I > >was > >in the First Scouting Force where we flew until they thought we had enough. > >There is a great web site on all the fighter groups and the scouting forces > >at Try it out. > > Good Luck Spider Smith > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Kevin Pearson" > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > >Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2001 1:45 PM > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear > > > > > > > My good friend Lou LaHood from the 91st BG said he had heat in his > >B-17G, > > > s/n 42-31673, in the cockpit. And that he wore long johns, and several > > > other layers of cloths, but did not wear a heavy coat, only his A-2. He > >was > > > in the ETO from Jan. to May 44. Given how drafty those old birds were, > >I > > > don't see how the heat could have done much good, especially at > >altitude. > > > But given the level of combat, maybe the heart pumped a little faster > >and > > > kept a guy a bit warmer than if he was not flying combat. The other > >thing > >I > > > can't stand about the remake of Memphis Belle is how the pilot and > >copilot > > > are wearing their 50 mission crush caps on the mission. Incredible! > > > Hollywood did it again. (But I still love to see Fortresses in flight, > >even > > > if it's in a bad movie.) > > > Kevin > > > > > > > > > >From: William Heller > > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear > > > >Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2001 13:06:52 -0800 > > > > > > > >Mike ... et al ... > > > > > > > >The gaps where the bomb bay doors fit to the fuselage and other various > > > >"non fits" are of no consequence when one considers that the waist > >windows > > > >where the waist gunners operated, were open, as was the roof of the > >radio > > > >room from whence the radio gunner operated. > > > > > > > >The B17s were not built as airliners but for combat and speed of > >production > > > >was quite of the essence. > > > > > > > >Any "comfort" desired was done by the manner in which you dressed for > >the > > > >position in which you were flying. In fact, comfort was not a concern. > >We > > > >were in war and had the best equipment possible at the time. Some of > >the > > > >concerns I hear are what make me wonder if today's people truly > >understood > > > >what the hell was going on ... WE WERE AT WAR... AND, we WON ! .... > >we > > > >have not won one since! > > > > > > > >This should tell us something. > > > > > > > >Cheers! > > > > > > > >WCH > > > > > > > >Mike McClanahan wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Jim and Bills- > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for taking the time to reply to my post. Your comments are > >very > > > > > helpful and confirm my personal observations from the B-17 flight I > >took > > > > > this summer. I was struck by the size of the gaps around the bomb > >bay > > > > > doors and the ball turret and wondered why something wasn't done to > > > > > address them. I guess the designers never had to fly in the planes > >and > > > > > experience how cold it could get for themselves. > > > > > > > > > > I've had several good responses to my post and it seems that while > >all > > > > > the gunners dressed in as much cold weather gear as they could, the > > > > > pilots and navigator and bombardier had quite a bit of variability. > > > > > Some have told me that long johns and A-2s were enough while others, > > > > > especially navs and bombardiers, have said they put on as much as > >they > > > > > could. I suppose each person had his own level of tolerance for the > > > > > tradeoff between warmth and mobility. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks again for your help, > > > > > > > > > > Mike McClanahan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > 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 Tue Nov 6 00:53:08 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (William Heller) Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2001 16:53:08 -0800 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear References: <000801c16647$25cd3080$4df833cf@richards> Message-ID: <3BE73474.E0AA72BD@attglobal.net> Kevin ... Spider is correct. The glycol heaters were disabled due to leaks and other problems with them and they were a drug on maintenance. As for the B24, the box OUR airplane came in, he IS correct again. We CHEERED when we heard they would be in the bomber column that mission. Also, my Luftwaffe friends, of which I have many, having flown as Captain with Lufthansa for ten years and worked with and became great friends with those against whom we flew ... to a man, they tell me they WANTED the B24s for they were so easy to attack AND down. Methinks there is a great amount of questions about our COMFORT .... this was war, AND, we WON it. Comfort was not the concern. I gleaned this even from the fellow who wondered about the "loose fit" of the bomb bay doors. We were NOT ON A PLEASURE FLIGHT! We were in war. Some of the "comfort" concerns you fellows have lead me to understand why, for some reason, we have not won a war since ours! And, with all the open windows and hatches which we had on our B17s, WHY would we concern ourselves with loose-fitting bomb bay doors as pertains to any comfort? We were a great bunch of comrades AND we appreciated each other and mourned our losses, but we fought on each day .... We never thought of many of the concerns you fellows seem to think we had time for ... Cheers! WCH Dick Smith wrote: > Kevin: > I don't know the flash point of the heater fluid . The reason for disabling > the heaters was probably someone's stupidity but that's what we were told. > As for electric suits we didn't wear them because they could get hot spots > because of the wire used and they would give you bad burns. > As for crew so of the Box The B17 Came In(B24) they were a fire trap anyway > . We used to cheer when it was announced that they were going to the same > target as we were ,because then we wouldn't see any German fighters because > they would go after the boxes. > > Spider > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Kevin Pearson" > To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > Sent: Monday, November 05, 2001 6:23 AM > Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear > > > Spider, you're back! Great to have you back. Question: I got jumped all > > over by a B-24 chat group when I made a remark that 24s were prone to > > burning because of all the hydraulic fluid used to control many flight > > functions. One seemlingly very informed person wrote me a very detailed > > response which basically said the "flash point" of hydraulic fluid was so > > high it was theoretically impossible for the stuff to catch fire. What > are > > the thoughts of this group? And since ethylene glycol must be mixed with > > water to work properly, is there really a danger of fire? I would doubt > it, > > but as we have all seen, it wouldn't be the first time! > > Kevin > > > > > > >From: "Dick Smith" > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear > > >Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2001 15:54:16 -0800 > > > > > >Hi Kevin: > > > You were wondering where Spider was ,well I'm back from seeing my Kids > in > > >Prescott Az. . > > > The heaters on our B17 G's was disconnected in the cockpit because the > > >heaters used Ethylene Glycol the same as Auto heaters to transfer the > heat > > >to the cockpit . We were told they removed them because of the fire > danger > > >from the Ethylene Glycol. > > > As for fighter tours they were based on hours flown ,not on Missions. I > > >was > > >in the First Scouting Force where we flew until they thought we had > enough. > > >There is a great web site on all the fighter groups and the scouting > forces > > >at Try it out. > > > Good Luck Spider Smith > > >----- Original Message ----- > > >From: "Kevin Pearson" > > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > > >Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2001 1:45 PM > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear > > > > > > > > > > My good friend Lou LaHood from the 91st BG said he had heat in his > > >B-17G, > > > > s/n 42-31673, in the cockpit. And that he wore long johns, and > several > > > > other layers of cloths, but did not wear a heavy coat, only his A-2. > He > > >was > > > > in the ETO from Jan. to May 44. Given how drafty those old birds > were, > > >I > > > > don't see how the heat could have done much good, especially at > > >altitude. > > > > But given the level of combat, maybe the heart pumped a little faster > > >and > > > > kept a guy a bit warmer than if he was not flying combat. The other > > >thing > > >I > > > > can't stand about the remake of Memphis Belle is how the pilot and > > >copilot > > > > are wearing their 50 mission crush caps on the mission. Incredible! > > > > Hollywood did it again. (But I still love to see Fortresses in > flight, > > >even > > > > if it's in a bad movie.) > > > > Kevin > > > > > > > > > > > > >From: William Heller > > > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear > > > > >Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2001 13:06:52 -0800 > > > > > > > > > >Mike ... et al ... > > > > > > > > > >The gaps where the bomb bay doors fit to the fuselage and other > various > > > > >"non fits" are of no consequence when one considers that the waist > > >windows > > > > >where the waist gunners operated, were open, as was the roof of the > > >radio > > > > >room from whence the radio gunner operated. > > > > > > > > > >The B17s were not built as airliners but for combat and speed of > > >production > > > > >was quite of the essence. > > > > > > > > > >Any "comfort" desired was done by the manner in which you dressed for > > >the > > > > >position in which you were flying. In fact, comfort was not a > concern. > > >We > > > > >were in war and had the best equipment possible at the time. Some of > > >the > > > > >concerns I hear are what make me wonder if today's people truly > > >understood > > > > >what the hell was going on ... WE WERE AT WAR... AND, we WON ! .... > > >we > > > > >have not won one since! > > > > > > > > > >This should tell us something. > > > > > > > > > >Cheers! > > > > > > > > > >WCH > > > > > > > > > >Mike McClanahan wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Jim and Bills- > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for taking the time to reply to my post. Your comments are > > >very > > > > > > helpful and confirm my personal observations from the B-17 flight > I > > >took > > > > > > this summer. I was struck by the size of the gaps around the bomb > > >bay > > > > > > doors and the ball turret and wondered why something wasn't done > to > > > > > > address them. I guess the designers never had to fly in the > planes > > >and > > > > > > experience how cold it could get for themselves. > > > > > > > > > > > > I've had several good responses to my post and it seems that while > > >all > > > > > > the gunners dressed in as much cold weather gear as they could, > the > > > > > > pilots and navigator and bombardier had quite a bit of > variability. > > > > > > Some have told me that long johns and A-2s were enough while > others, > > > > > > especially navs and bombardiers, have said they put on as much as > > >they > > > > > > could. I suppose each person had his own level of tolerance for > the > > > > > > tradeoff between warmth and mobility. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks again for your help, > > > > > > > > > > > > Mike McClanahan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > 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 Tue Nov 6 05:21:47 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com) Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 00:21:47 EST Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear Message-ID: Very well said Bill Heller and you too Spider, except I wore and used my electric heated suit, shoes and gloves. If they shorted out which they did once or twice I shut them off QUICK. Even damn quick. I didn't know the bomb bay doors didn't fit well. Didn't spend much time back there. I wore enough cloths, I didn't freeze without the heated blanket suit. Our missions were rarely over 10 or 12 hours and I could be a bit cold for that long. As I think about it. If the bomb bay door didn't fit tight when closed the air would not come in, It would go out. I think some Frenchman or Italian named Bearnewly or Vernturi invented this, but he probably didn't get a patient on it in time to keep us poor sissy air crews warm. Damn, double damn. Best Wishes, Jack From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Nov 6 14:32:58 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2001 08:32:58 -0600 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear Message-ID: Dick: Perhaps this topic did come up before and I didn't see it. Could you please tell me more about your testing. Why were you doing these smoke drills? Where you testing gas masks? Where did you perform these tests, US or ETO? I am overwhelmed when I think of all the science created during the war, from microwave ovens and radar, to synthetics like plastics and rubber. What a remarkable time in history! Kevin >From: "Bill Jones" >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear >Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2001 17:08:46 -0500 > > > >...... Question: I got jumped all > > over by a B-24 chat group when I made a remark that 24s were prone to > > burning because of all the hydraulic fluid used to control many flight > > functions. One seemlingly very informed person wrote me a very detailed > > response which basically said the "flash point" of hydraulic fluid was >so > > high it was theoretically impossible for the stuff to catch fire. What >are > > the thoughts of this group? > >I think that this topic came up once before, and I think that one >aspect was that there are at least 2 different types of hydraulic fluid >used in aircraft, which have greatly different properties. However as >part of my job, I used to perform field tests of items exposed to a >variety of "typical" smokes that might be encountered in military >situations, and one of the smokes was burning hydraulic fluid. To >generate the smoke, we would pour out a pint or so of army issue >hydraulic fluid into a big metal pan, similar to the lid of a trash can. >We would then try to ignite it with a propane torch. It would burn, >but it would generally require heating the edge of the puddle, where >the metal meets the liquid, for often up to 5 minutes before it would >catch fire, and then, it was about as vigorous as a candle. At 40 >below temperatures, I don't think it would be very hazardous, but >then they may have used a different formulation back then. > > > >And since ethylene glycol must be mixed with > > water to work properly, is there really a danger of fire? I would doubt >it, > > but as we have all seen, it wouldn't be the first time! > > Kevin > > > > > > >From: "Dick Smith" > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear > > >Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2001 15:54:16 -0800 > > > > > >Hi Kevin: > > > You were wondering where Spider was ,well I'm back from seeing my >Kids in > > >Prescott Az. . > > > The heaters on our B17 G's was disconnected in the cockpit because >the > > >heaters used Ethylene Glycol the same as Auto heaters to transfer the >heat > > >to the cockpit . We were told they removed them because of the fire >danger > > >from the Ethylene Glycol. > > > As for fighter tours they were based on hours flown ,not on Missions. >I > > >was > > >in the First Scouting Force where we flew until they thought we had >enough. > > >There is a great web site on all the fighter groups and the scouting >forces > > >at Try it out. > > > Good Luck Spider Smith > > >----- Original Message ----- > > >From: "Kevin Pearson" > > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > > >Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2001 1:45 PM > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear > > > > > > > > > > My good friend Lou LaHood from the 91st BG said he had heat in his > > >B-17G, > > > > s/n 42-31673, in the cockpit. And that he wore long johns, and >several > > > > other layers of cloths, but did not wear a heavy coat, only his A-2. > He > > >was > > > > in the ETO from Jan. to May 44. Given how drafty those old birds >were, > > >I > > > > don't see how the heat could have done much good, especially at > > >altitude. > > > > But given the level of combat, maybe the heart pumped a little >faster > > >and > > > > kept a guy a bit warmer than if he was not flying combat. The other > > >thing > > >I > > > > can't stand about the remake of Memphis Belle is how the pilot and > > >copilot > > > > are wearing their 50 mission crush caps on the mission. Incredible! > > > > Hollywood did it again. (But I still love to see Fortresses in >flight, > > >even > > > > if it's in a bad movie.) > > > > Kevin > > > > > > > > > > > > >From: William Heller > > > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying >gear > > > > >Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2001 13:06:52 -0800 > > > > > > > > > >Mike ... et al ... > > > > > > > > > >The gaps where the bomb bay doors fit to the fuselage and other >various > > > > >"non fits" are of no consequence when one considers that the waist > > >windows > > > > >where the waist gunners operated, were open, as was the roof of the > > >radio > > > > >room from whence the radio gunner operated. > > > > > > > > > >The B17s were not built as airliners but for combat and speed of > > >production > > > > >was quite of the essence. > > > > > > > > > >Any "comfort" desired was done by the manner in which you dressed >for > > >the > > > > >position in which you were flying. In fact, comfort was not a >concern. > > >We > > > > >were in war and had the best equipment possible at the time. Some >of > > >the > > > > >concerns I hear are what make me wonder if today's people truly > > >understood > > > > >what the hell was going on ... WE WERE AT WAR... AND, we WON ! >.... > > >we > > > > >have not won one since! > > > > > > > > > >This should tell us something. > > > > > > > > > >Cheers! > > > > > > > > > >WCH > > > > > > > > > >Mike McClanahan wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Jim and Bills- > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for taking the time to reply to my post. Your comments >are > > >very > > > > > > helpful and confirm my personal observations from the B-17 >flight I > > >took > > > > > > this summer. I was struck by the size of the gaps around the >bomb > > >bay > > > > > > doors and the ball turret and wondered why something wasn't done >to > > > > > > address them. I guess the designers never had to fly in the >planes > > >and > > > > > > experience how cold it could get for themselves. > > > > > > > > > > > > I've had several good responses to my post and it seems that >while > > >all > > > > > > the gunners dressed in as much cold weather gear as they could, >the > > > > > > pilots and navigator and bombardier had quite a bit of >variability. > > > > > > Some have told me that long johns and A-2s were enough while >others, > > > > > > especially navs and bombardiers, have said they put on as much >as > > >they > > > > > > could. I suppose each person had his own level of tolerance for >the > > > > > > tradeoff between warmth and mobility. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks again for your help, > > > > > > > > > > > > Mike McClanahan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > 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 > > > > > > > Bill Jones N3JLQ Sweden Maine wejones@megalink.net > Main home page http://www.megalink.net/~wejones > WWII/B-17 page http://www.megalink.net/~wejones/wwii.html > > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Nov 6 14:49:41 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2001 08:49:41 -0600 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear Message-ID: Hi Bill: Thanks for your comments. Just for the record, I've never thought your a/c were made for comfort. The first time I got in a B-17 (without permission, mind you, but I just had to get inside), I sat down on that cold, bare metal pilot seat and immediately knew the Fort was an instrument of war, not a cozy airliner. On my way out of the plane that day, as I exited the bombay into the radio room, I banged my forehead on the bulkhead. And the first time I flew in a Fort, the noise from the engines was not to be believed. No wonder some of you guys are hard of hearing. What was it about the B-24s that the Luftwaffe like so much. The 24s flew faster than a 17, and appears to be equally well armed. Was it because they could not sustain the battle damage that a Fort could. We've talked about the Davis Wing and how it had a tendancy to buckle under stress. And another question for you since you have met far many more Luftwaffe pilots than me. Were the tactics the same for attacking B-17s and B-24s? I know you might have a bit of disdain for this question as I am reminded of your comments on an earlier post that you said it was nearly impossible to describe tactics because they changed so often. But the 24, like the 17, must have had some weak spot(s). The 24's twin .50 power turret in the tail had to be more of a deterrant than the manual .50s in the 17. Bill, you are a real asset to this forum and I want to thank you for answering my many questions. For that matter, thanks to all of you guys for helping this 44 year old learn more about that time in history. You are walking treasure chests of information. Kevin >From: William Heller >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear >Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2001 16:53:08 -0800 > >Kevin ... > >Spider is correct. The glycol heaters were disabled due to leaks and other >problems with them and they were a drug on maintenance. As for the B24, >the >box OUR airplane came in, he IS correct again. We CHEERED when we heard >they >would be in the bomber column that mission. Also, my Luftwaffe friends, of >which I have many, having flown as Captain with Lufthansa for ten years and >worked with and became great friends with those against whom we flew ... to >a >man, they tell me they WANTED the B24s for they were so easy to attack AND >down. > >Methinks there is a great amount of questions about our COMFORT .... this >was >war, AND, we WON it. Comfort was not the concern. I gleaned this even from >the >fellow who wondered about the "loose fit" of the bomb bay doors. We were >NOT ON >A PLEASURE FLIGHT! We were in war. Some of the "comfort" concerns you >fellows >have lead me to understand why, for some reason, we have not won a war >since >ours! And, with all the open windows and hatches which we had on our B17s, >WHY >would we concern ourselves with loose-fitting bomb bay doors as pertains to >any >comfort? > >We were a great bunch of comrades AND we appreciated each other and mourned >our >losses, but we fought on each day .... We never thought of many of the >concerns you fellows seem to think we had time for ... > >Cheers! > >WCH > >Dick Smith wrote: > > > Kevin: > > I don't know the flash point of the heater fluid . The reason for >disabling > > the heaters was probably someone's stupidity but that's what we were >told. > > As for electric suits we didn't wear them because they could get hot >spots > > because of the wire used and they would give you bad burns. > > As for crew so of the Box The B17 Came In(B24) they were a fire trap >anyway > > . We used to cheer when it was announced that they were going to the >same > > target as we were ,because then we wouldn't see any German fighters >because > > they would go after the boxes. > > > > Spider > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Kevin Pearson" > > To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > > Sent: Monday, November 05, 2001 6:23 AM > > Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear > > > > > Spider, you're back! Great to have you back. Question: I got jumped >all > > > over by a B-24 chat group when I made a remark that 24s were prone to > > > burning because of all the hydraulic fluid used to control many flight > > > functions. One seemlingly very informed person wrote me a very >detailed > > > response which basically said the "flash point" of hydraulic fluid was >so > > > high it was theoretically impossible for the stuff to catch fire. >What > > are > > > the thoughts of this group? And since ethylene glycol must be mixed >with > > > water to work properly, is there really a danger of fire? I would >doubt > > it, > > > but as we have all seen, it wouldn't be the first time! > > > Kevin > > > > > > > > > >From: "Dick Smith" > > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear > > > >Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2001 15:54:16 -0800 > > > > > > > >Hi Kevin: > > > > You were wondering where Spider was ,well I'm back from seeing my >Kids > > in > > > >Prescott Az. . > > > > The heaters on our B17 G's was disconnected in the cockpit because >the > > > >heaters used Ethylene Glycol the same as Auto heaters to transfer the > > heat > > > >to the cockpit . We were told they removed them because of the fire > > danger > > > >from the Ethylene Glycol. > > > > As for fighter tours they were based on hours flown ,not on >Missions. I > > > >was > > > >in the First Scouting Force where we flew until they thought we had > > enough. > > > >There is a great web site on all the fighter groups and the scouting > > forces > > > >at Try it out. > > > > Good Luck Spider Smith > > > >----- Original Message ----- > > > >From: "Kevin Pearson" > > > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > > > >Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2001 1:45 PM > > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear > > > > > > > > > > > > > My good friend Lou LaHood from the 91st BG said he had heat in his > > > >B-17G, > > > > > s/n 42-31673, in the cockpit. And that he wore long johns, and > > several > > > > > other layers of cloths, but did not wear a heavy coat, only his >A-2. > > He > > > >was > > > > > in the ETO from Jan. to May 44. Given how drafty those old birds > > were, > > > >I > > > > > don't see how the heat could have done much good, especially at > > > >altitude. > > > > > But given the level of combat, maybe the heart pumped a little >faster > > > >and > > > > > kept a guy a bit warmer than if he was not flying combat. The >other > > > >thing > > > >I > > > > > can't stand about the remake of Memphis Belle is how the pilot and > > > >copilot > > > > > are wearing their 50 mission crush caps on the mission. >Incredible! > > > > > Hollywood did it again. (But I still love to see Fortresses in > > flight, > > > >even > > > > > if it's in a bad movie.) > > > > > Kevin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >From: William Heller > > > > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > > > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying >gear > > > > > >Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2001 13:06:52 -0800 > > > > > > > > > > > >Mike ... et al ... > > > > > > > > > > > >The gaps where the bomb bay doors fit to the fuselage and other > > various > > > > > >"non fits" are of no consequence when one considers that the >waist > > > >windows > > > > > >where the waist gunners operated, were open, as was the roof of >the > > > >radio > > > > > >room from whence the radio gunner operated. > > > > > > > > > > > >The B17s were not built as airliners but for combat and speed of > > > >production > > > > > >was quite of the essence. > > > > > > > > > > > >Any "comfort" desired was done by the manner in which you dressed >for > > > >the > > > > > >position in which you were flying. In fact, comfort was not a > > concern. > > > >We > > > > > >were in war and had the best equipment possible at the time. Some >of > > > >the > > > > > >concerns I hear are what make me wonder if today's people truly > > > >understood > > > > > >what the hell was going on ... WE WERE AT WAR... AND, we WON ! >.... > > > >we > > > > > >have not won one since! > > > > > > > > > > > >This should tell us something. > > > > > > > > > > > >Cheers! > > > > > > > > > > > >WCH > > > > > > > > > > > >Mike McClanahan wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Jim and Bills- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for taking the time to reply to my post. Your comments >are > > > >very > > > > > > > helpful and confirm my personal observations from the B-17 >flight > > I > > > >took > > > > > > > this summer. I was struck by the size of the gaps around the >bomb > > > >bay > > > > > > > doors and the ball turret and wondered why something wasn't >done > > to > > > > > > > address them. I guess the designers never had to fly in the > > planes > > > >and > > > > > > > experience how cold it could get for themselves. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I've had several good responses to my post and it seems that >while > > > >all > > > > > > > the gunners dressed in as much cold weather gear as they >could, > > the > > > > > > > pilots and navigator and bombardier had quite a bit of > > variability. > > > > > > > Some have told me that long johns and A-2s were enough while > > others, > > > > > > > especially navs and bombardiers, have said they put on as much >as > > > >they > > > > > > > could. I suppose each person had his own level of tolerance >for > > the > > > > > > > tradeoff between warmth and mobility. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks again for your help, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mike McClanahan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > > 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 Tue Nov 6 19:22:15 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Kevin Pearson) Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2001 13:22:15 -0600 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Navigation Question Message-ID: Here is a question I have been thinking about for the last couple of weeks. How does a pilot take into account the rotation of the Earth into time, speed and distance equations. On a 12 hour flight from Tokyo heading East at 500 mph, certainly the rotation of the Earth would have an impact on ETA. I am a pilot and took several classes on navigation, but for a puddle jumper pilot, this never came up. Bill Heller, can you help me with this. Maybe the Earth is turning so slowly that it makes no difference, but I'd like to know from a pro. Thanks, guys! Kevin _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Nov 6 20:12:05 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (William Heller) Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2001 12:12:05 -0800 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear References: Message-ID: <3BE84414.8283B9F8@attglobal.net> Kevin ... The B24 could not fly as fast as it was able because it was part of a strike force ... and therefore had to stay at the speed of all attacking force. The B24 was a far more HUGE target and thus the Luftwaffe liked that. The B24 was weaker in the wing root area ... or so it certainly appeared when I saw it being attacked at that spot. The wing would merely fold right up, and down would go the B24! My Luftwaffe friends admitted to me that they attacked the B24 in THIS area due to its known weakness. Once, after I had been shot out of a formation over Norway ... and I was making my way for the North Sea and to get down on the deck and go home ... I watched, over Stavanger, a B24 being ferociously attacked by a Ju88 (twin). The bullets were streaming from the Ju88 RIGHT INTO THE WING ROOT AREA and all of a sudden the B24 wing folded up and DOWN he went. In pieces. No one got out. And then, the Ju88 completely ignored me and went away. I made it to the North Sea and went down on the deck and a lone FW190 saw me and attacked. However, we were then at 1000 feet and when the FW190 made his famous head-on attack and split essed, HE SPLIT ESSED RIGHT DOWN INTO THE SEA! Kerplunk! That was the famous "rote" problem we were told the enemy had ....., he was trained to do a split ess after a headon attack ..... uh huh! ... Duh! HE WAS AT 1000 feet! I have long felt that the B24 was in the ETO due to "politics" .... The B17, known as the Flying Fortress was getting so much publicity that I am almost sure "someone" in Washington said, "We'd better get some B24s over there or Consolidated will get angry.... " That is only an idea of mine, but as I know the government, it sounds logical. The B17 was a sleek ariplane and built like a brick shit house. It made less than HALF the target a B24 made ....the B24 was a fine airplane for the Pacific and long distance flying, especially with that Davis wing, but it could not fly as high as could we in the 17 nor as close formation due to its very bulk. In sports as in war, people become very attached to this or that ... it was the same with the B24 fellows. They had every right to love their airplane, but it was NOT the plane for the job that the B17 was. Cheers! WCH Kevin Pearson wrote: > Hi Bill: Thanks for your comments. Just for the record, I've never thought > your a/c were made for comfort. The first time I got in a B-17 (without > permission, mind you, but I just had to get inside), I sat down on that > cold, bare metal pilot seat and immediately knew the Fort was an instrument > of war, not a cozy airliner. On my way out of the plane that day, as I > exited the bombay into the radio room, I banged my forehead on the bulkhead. > And the first time I flew in a Fort, the noise from the engines was not to > be believed. No wonder some of you guys are hard of hearing. > > What was it about the B-24s that the Luftwaffe like so much. The 24s flew > faster than a 17, and appears to be equally well armed. Was it because they > could not sustain the battle damage that a Fort could. We've talked about > the Davis Wing and how it had a tendancy to buckle under stress. > > And another question for you since you have met far many more Luftwaffe > pilots than me. Were the tactics the same for attacking B-17s and B-24s? I > know you might have a bit of disdain for this question as I am reminded of > your comments on an earlier post that you said it was nearly impossible to > describe tactics because they changed so often. But the 24, like the 17, > must have had some weak spot(s). The 24's twin .50 power turret in the tail > had to be more of a deterrant than the manual .50s in the 17. > > Bill, you are a real asset to this forum and I want to thank you for > answering my many questions. For that matter, thanks to all of you guys for > helping this 44 year old learn more about that time in history. You are > walking treasure chests of information. > Kevin > > >From: William Heller > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear > >Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2001 16:53:08 -0800 > > > >Kevin ... > > > >Spider is correct. The glycol heaters were disabled due to leaks and other > >problems with them and they were a drug on maintenance. As for the B24, > >the > >box OUR airplane came in, he IS correct again. We CHEERED when we heard > >they > >would be in the bomber column that mission. Also, my Luftwaffe friends, of > >which I have many, having flown as Captain with Lufthansa for ten years and > >worked with and became great friends with those against whom we flew ... to > >a > >man, they tell me they WANTED the B24s for they were so easy to attack AND > >down. > > > >Methinks there is a great amount of questions about our COMFORT .... this > >was > >war, AND, we WON it. Comfort was not the concern. I gleaned this even from > >the > >fellow who wondered about the "loose fit" of the bomb bay doors. We were > >NOT ON > >A PLEASURE FLIGHT! We were in war. Some of the "comfort" concerns you > >fellows > >have lead me to understand why, for some reason, we have not won a war > >since > >ours! And, with all the open windows and hatches which we had on our B17s, > >WHY > >would we concern ourselves with loose-fitting bomb bay doors as pertains to > >any > >comfort? > > > >We were a great bunch of comrades AND we appreciated each other and mourned > >our > >losses, but we fought on each day .... We never thought of many of the > >concerns you fellows seem to think we had time for ... > > > >Cheers! > > > >WCH > > > >Dick Smith wrote: > > > > > Kevin: > > > I don't know the flash point of the heater fluid . The reason for > >disabling > > > the heaters was probably someone's stupidity but that's what we were > >told. > > > As for electric suits we didn't wear them because they could get hot > >spots > > > because of the wire used and they would give you bad burns. > > > As for crew so of the Box The B17 Came In(B24) they were a fire trap > >anyway > > > . We used to cheer when it was announced that they were going to the > >same > > > target as we were ,because then we wouldn't see any German fighters > >because > > > they would go after the boxes. > > > > > > Spider > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Kevin Pearson" > > > To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > > > Sent: Monday, November 05, 2001 6:23 AM > > > Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear > > > > > > > Spider, you're back! Great to have you back. Question: I got jumped > >all > > > > over by a B-24 chat group when I made a remark that 24s were prone to > > > > burning because of all the hydraulic fluid used to control many flight > > > > functions. One seemlingly very informed person wrote me a very > >detailed > > > > response which basically said the "flash point" of hydraulic fluid was > >so > > > > high it was theoretically impossible for the stuff to catch fire. > >What > > > are > > > > the thoughts of this group? And since ethylene glycol must be mixed > >with > > > > water to work properly, is there really a danger of fire? I would > >doubt > > > it, > > > > but as we have all seen, it wouldn't be the first time! > > > > Kevin > > > > > > > > > > > > >From: "Dick Smith" > > > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > > > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear > > > > >Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2001 15:54:16 -0800 > > > > > > > > > >Hi Kevin: > > > > > You were wondering where Spider was ,well I'm back from seeing my > >Kids > > > in > > > > >Prescott Az. . > > > > > The heaters on our B17 G's was disconnected in the cockpit because > >the > > > > >heaters used Ethylene Glycol the same as Auto heaters to transfer the > > > heat > > > > >to the cockpit . We were told they removed them because of the fire > > > danger > > > > >from the Ethylene Glycol. > > > > > As for fighter tours they were based on hours flown ,not on > >Missions. I > > > > >was > > > > >in the First Scouting Force where we flew until they thought we had > > > enough. > > > > >There is a great web site on all the fighter groups and the scouting > > > forces > > > > >at Try it out. > > > > > Good Luck Spider Smith > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > > > > >From: "Kevin Pearson" > > > > >To: <303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com> > > > > >Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2001 1:45 PM > > > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying gear > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My good friend Lou LaHood from the 91st BG said he had heat in his > > > > >B-17G, > > > > > > s/n 42-31673, in the cockpit. And that he wore long johns, and > > > several > > > > > > other layers of cloths, but did not wear a heavy coat, only his > >A-2. > > > He > > > > >was > > > > > > in the ETO from Jan. to May 44. Given how drafty those old birds > > > were, > > > > >I > > > > > > don't see how the heat could have done much good, especially at > > > > >altitude. > > > > > > But given the level of combat, maybe the heart pumped a little > >faster > > > > >and > > > > > > kept a guy a bit warmer than if he was not flying combat. The > >other > > > > >thing > > > > >I > > > > > > can't stand about the remake of Memphis Belle is how the pilot and > > > > >copilot > > > > > > are wearing their 50 mission crush caps on the mission. > >Incredible! > > > > > > Hollywood did it again. (But I still love to see Fortresses in > > > flight, > > > > >even > > > > > > if it's in a bad movie.) > > > > > > Kevin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >From: William Heller > > > > > > >Reply-To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > > > > >To: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com > > > > > > >Subject: Re: [303rd-Talk] Re: [HeavyBombers] Cold weather flying > >gear > > > > > > >Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2001 13:06:52 -0800 > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Mike ... et al ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > >The gaps where the bomb bay doors fit to the fuselage and other > > > various > > > > > > >"non fits" are of no consequence when one considers that the > >waist > > > > >windows > > > > > > >where the waist gunners operated, were open, as was the roof of > >the > > > > >radio > > > > > > >room from whence the radio gunner operated. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >The B17s were not built as airliners but for combat and speed of > > > > >production > > > > > > >was quite of the essence. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Any "comfort" desired was done by the manner in which you dressed > >for > > > > >the > > > > > > >position in which you were flying. In fact, comfort was not a > > > concern. > > > > >We > > > > > > >were in war and had the best equipment possible at the time. Some > >of > > > > >the > > > > > > >concerns I hear are what make me wonder if today's people truly > > > > >understood > > > > > > >what the hell was going on ... WE WERE AT WAR... AND, we WON ! > >.... > > > > >we > > > > > > >have not won one since! > > > > > > > > > > > > > >This should tell us something. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Cheers! > > > > > > > > > > > > > >WCH > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Mike McClanahan wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Jim and Bills- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for taking the time to reply to my post. Your comments > >are > > > > >very > > > > > > > > helpful and confirm my personal observations from the B-17 > >flight > > > I > > > > >took > > > > > > > > this summer. I was struck by the size of the gaps around the > >bomb > > > > >bay > > > > > > > > doors and the ball turret and wondered why something wasn't > >done > > > to > > > > > > > > address them. I guess the designers never had to fly in the > > > planes > > > > >and > > > > > > > > experience how cold it could get for themselves. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I've had several good responses to my post and it seems that > >while > > > > >all > > > > > > > > the gunners dressed in as much cold weather gear as they > >could, > > > the > > > > > > > > pilots and navigator and bombardier had quite a bit of > > > variability. > > > > > > > > Some have told me that long johns and A-2s were enough while > > > others, > > > > > > > > especially navs and bombardiers, have said they put on as much > >as > > > > >they > > > > > > > > could. I suppose each person had his own level of tolerance > >for > > > the > > > > > > > > tradeoff between warmth and mobility. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks again for your help, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mike McClanahan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > > > 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 Tue Nov 6 20:19:32 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (William Heller) Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2001 12:19:32 -0800 Subject: [303rd-Talk] Navigation Question References: Message-ID: <3BE845D4.2686DFD6@attglobal.net> Kevin ... If what you say about the rotation of the earth is true, then we would have different ETA's when going the OTHER direction. We are flying through the AIR. We fly through that air at a certain speed, no matter which direction we are going. Even North and South. Think of it this way, Kevin ... if you were riding in a train and your suitcase was in the overhead rack above your seat ... then WHY, if it became dislodged, did it not fall on the seat BEHIND you, since the train is going so fast? Reminds me of the airline pilot, taking off from a spot in India near the Taj Mahl, who lost an engine on takeoff and thought he might crash into the Taj Mahal. Realizing he had a cargo of birds in cages, he shot off his pistol toward the cabin, thus scaring the birds so they ALL TOOK WING. This, then, made his load that much lighter while they took wing, and voila, he missed the Taj .... I believe it will take a Space Scientist who handled the Moon shots and other shots ... to answer your query why an airplane might fly quicker going against the earth rotation than if he were flying WITH the direction of rotation. I cannot. Cheers! WCH Kevin Pearson wrote: > Here is a question I have been thinking about for the last couple of weeks. > How does a pilot take into account the rotation of the Earth into time, > speed and distance equations. On a 12 hour flight from Tokyo heading East > at 500 mph, certainly the rotation of the Earth would have an impact on ETA. > > I am a pilot and took several classes on navigation, but for a puddle jumper > pilot, this never came up. Bill Heller, can you help me with this. Maybe > the Earth is turning so slowly that it makes no difference, but I'd like to > know from a pro. > > Thanks, guys! > Kevin > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com Tue Nov 6 20:27:27 2001 From: 303rd-talk@303rdBGA.com (Hollritt, Todd) Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 15:27:27 -0500 Subject: [303rd-Talk] RAF Slang Message-ID: <1F494A0E3B54D2118A9200805FFE8AF805E6A656@ner-msg06.wireless.attws.com> Kevin, By George... I think I've got it! Alo, Mates! So there I was in the Office of my Hurryback, I had just finished some Bumps and Circuits over the field and thought I'd Get Cracking to see if I could Collect A Gong today! So I cranked up the Fan in my Kite and headed for the coast... Sure enough as I was Crabbing along I spotting a Jerry 109 Stooging About above me, I didn't want to make A Black of this and let the bugger Jink Away so I climbed up and played Pussy With Him. But as I was Screaming Downhill into the Dog Fight, his wingman, who I missed in the glare off my Greenhouse was suddenly on my tail feathers.... This chap was no Erk, or Bus Driver! Now I am not Shooting A Line here....As I started to Plug Away at the first Jerry I heard a loud Pleep and smoke began to pour into the Pulpit, I knew my engine would Pack Up soon!!! I figured just one more Squirt before I had to peel off.... But it was too late, I was heading for the drink! I checked my Mae West and Bailed out, sitting under my Brolly all I could think about was the Blond Job I had a Pint with last night, she thought I was a real Wizard! But my luck, I was Shot Down In Flames at the Pub too!! looks like my Stationmaster will have my rings!! It's the Dustbin in a Lank for me :( P.O. T. Hollritt 102 (much) SQ. RAF SHORT GLOSSARY OF RAF SLANG Balbo, A A large formation of aircraft Bale out To take to one's parachute Bind, A People who obstruct one Black, A Something badly done, a "bad show" Blitz, A solid lump of Large formation of enemy aircraft Blonde job, A Young woman with fair hair Bogus Sham, spurious Bomphleteers Airmen engaged on the early pamphlet raids Brassed off Diminutive of "browned off" Brolly Parachute Browned off, To be "Fed up" Bumps and Circuits Circuits and landings Bus driver A bomber pilot Buttoned up A job properly completed, "mastered" Completely Cheesed No hope at all Cope To accomplish, to deal with Crabbing along Flying near the ground or water Deck, Crack down on To "pancake" an aircraft Dog fight Aerial scrap Drill, The right Correct method of doing anything Drink, In the To come down into the sea Dud Applied to weather when unfit to fly Duff gen Dud information Dust bin Rear gunner's lower position in aircraft Erk, An A beginner in any job Fan The propeller Flak Anti-aircraft fire Flap A disturbance, general excitement Fox, To To do something clever or rather cunning Gen (pron jen) General information of any kind whatever George The automatic pilot Get Cracking Get going Gong, To collect a To get a medal Greenhouse Cockpit cover Hedge-hopping Flying so low that the aircraft appears to hop over the hedg