UAV operators now can get aviation awards
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 806
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have to agree with everything JustT has written.
My feelings though revolve around the remoteness of the task performed, which without a doubt brings a valuable asset to the battlefield, period.
Let's discuss the case of someone operating from Nellis.
Should medals be awarded that use qualifying criteria with terms such as courage, bravery and valour for someone who faces no danger and the risk of injury / death ?
Does it mean Predator Operators are NOT all those things ? Of course not. Hell, most of those guys have been on Ops themselves.
I'm not belittling the job being done, nor it's importance.
But the fact that you're removed from the theatre physically affords you a greater level of protection and safety than the guy in an A-10 or Harrier that's mixing it up amongst the fire which must change the actions you take and affect the decisions you make, to a more risk taking attitude than a conservative. Not suggesting you're reckless with the UAV's but you would do things with it that you might not do with your aircraft for fear of losing your life.
As an example, you might be awesome at Microsoft Combat Sim and will have a go at anything, taking on 4 aircraft whilst low on fuel and fight to the bitter end. Doesn't mean you'd do the same when placed in the real life situation though.
I'm not trying to compare the important job that Predator guys do with a computer game. I know a few of the guys there, and they are professional, good at their jobs and are the type that if they could be there in the thick of it, they would be. But I just feel that awarding medals for bravery etc devalues it for the Harrier mate or whoever that gets one for the same actions.
Parting Question. If you get a medal for flying Ops as a Predator Pilot, can you get the Tax free allowance for those day you flew in theatre ?
My feelings though revolve around the remoteness of the task performed, which without a doubt brings a valuable asset to the battlefield, period.
Let's discuss the case of someone operating from Nellis.
Should medals be awarded that use qualifying criteria with terms such as courage, bravery and valour for someone who faces no danger and the risk of injury / death ?
Does it mean Predator Operators are NOT all those things ? Of course not. Hell, most of those guys have been on Ops themselves.
I'm not belittling the job being done, nor it's importance.
But the fact that you're removed from the theatre physically affords you a greater level of protection and safety than the guy in an A-10 or Harrier that's mixing it up amongst the fire which must change the actions you take and affect the decisions you make, to a more risk taking attitude than a conservative. Not suggesting you're reckless with the UAV's but you would do things with it that you might not do with your aircraft for fear of losing your life.
As an example, you might be awesome at Microsoft Combat Sim and will have a go at anything, taking on 4 aircraft whilst low on fuel and fight to the bitter end. Doesn't mean you'd do the same when placed in the real life situation though.
I'm not trying to compare the important job that Predator guys do with a computer game. I know a few of the guys there, and they are professional, good at their jobs and are the type that if they could be there in the thick of it, they would be. But I just feel that awarding medals for bravery etc devalues it for the Harrier mate or whoever that gets one for the same actions.
Parting Question. If you get a medal for flying Ops as a Predator Pilot, can you get the Tax free allowance for those day you flew in theatre ?
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,574
Received 422 Likes
on
222 Posts
The award will be known as the:
Remotely Enabled Military Flight medal.
(I think that's what R.E.M.F. stands for
).
Remotely Enabled Military Flight medal.
(I think that's what R.E.M.F. stands for
).
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ivan Rogov - Currently UK crews at Nellis operate as part of a combined Predator force using US airframes which have been armed for some time and Brits have been called on to use lethal force. They operate a large fleet on round the clock ops. Will the RAF be able to manage sustained 24 ops by themselves with 2 Reapers? Unlikely for the reasons you stated but are we ever likely to be operating outside the combined environment in the foreseeable future? As far as arming it goes, I don’t have any info either way but IMHO why actively recruit a mix of crews from ISTAR and GR backgrounds and purchase a more expensive system (than MQ-1) that’s primary advantage over it’s predecessor is that it was designed as a hunter-killer from the outset? Draw your own conclusions.
I didn't mean to imply that aircrew members of the launch and recovery teams are any more at risk than anyone else inside the wire and they are certainly safer than those who have to venture outside the relatively safe environs of a DOB. It's is just that the picture painted by most is of a cushy REMF posting when it isn't always so. If the Predator program was based out of Machrihanish or Saxa Vord instead of Nevada would it come in for as much stick?
The roster is set at a responsible level to allow the crew to remain alert throughout their period of duty. I know most people in theatre are working long shifts and certainly the FJ guys get less than 3 days off in 9, but that is the year round working routine at Nellis. Deployed crews step up their work rate OOA as much as those moving onto a 12 hour shift pattern.
Certainly the fast and pointy jets in theatre can't achieve anywhere near the same persistence or extended levels of concentration the Predator can. Sure the chairs are more Barkerlounger than Maritn-Baker but it is the fact that operating conditions are less arduous that allows for longer operating hours without fatigue. The fast jet boys and girls do a fantastic job day in day out providing the effects required, kinetic or otherwise, but with the best will in the world they can’t maintain true round the clock operations. UAVs currently compliment, not replace, traditional manned aircraft in a variety of airpower roles and judging by our protracted procurement system will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.
Should UAV aircrew get recognition for endurance and remotely getting weapons on target? No, no more so than anyone should get an honour for just doing their job. However, where do you draw the line between your job and going above and beyond? When tasked on a high priority/high risk mission are you just doing your job? If the V force had ever launched knowing they would never return would they all have got VCs for “most conspicuous bravery, or some daring or pre-eminent act of valour or self-sacrifice, or extreme devotion to duty in the presence of the enemy?” Or were they just doing their job? Yes, I am being slightly facetious but why can’t a UAV pilot show “devotion to duty whilst flying in active operations against the enemy?” But your not flying I hear you all cry but as I previously stated, currently a UAV can no more fly and operate effectively without a crew than a manned aircraft can. Ok then, could a UAV pilot operating from another aircraft (http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/EquipmentAndLogistics/PilotlessPassengerJetFlownRemotelyByRafInWorldFirst.htm) be eligible for a DFC for guiding their UAV to defend pinned down troops in some corner of a foreign field? They may well receive recognition if they programmed a relatively dumb GPS guided bomb to strike the target, so why not for controlling a more sophisticated weapon system to do the same task? So why not if that weapon system was controlled via a satellite link from another airborne asset operating hundreds of miles away? So why not if that weapon system was operated by an unstressed crew in an air-conditioned, 1g environment with full situational awareness of the developing battle, comms with those on the ground, all the worlds int available at the click of a mouse button, access to advisors on LoAC and RoE and (firmly tongue in cheek) a Starbucks round the corner? You don’t have to suffer yourself to make a big difference to others.
I must agree though that it would be impossible for a UAV crew to be awarded a medal for valour as there just isn’t the mortal danger to be overcome. VCs are therefore out of the question but I don’t believe that other awards should be ruled out merely on grounds of remoteness.
Finally I’m not on a UK UAV posting but I do have a healthy interest in an expanding capability within the RAF. The future is coming and not everyone likes the way it looks but that won’t change it. UAVs give us the capability to do the job without risking lives unnecessarily, is that such a bad thing? Many of those who chose/are chosen to do the job have flown on operations in FJ/AT/AH/SH and will return there after their tour. Should they be vilified for the decision to contribute effectively and for a prolonged period to UK operations? Or should they not have the possibility of being recognized for their efforts?
I didn't mean to imply that aircrew members of the launch and recovery teams are any more at risk than anyone else inside the wire and they are certainly safer than those who have to venture outside the relatively safe environs of a DOB. It's is just that the picture painted by most is of a cushy REMF posting when it isn't always so. If the Predator program was based out of Machrihanish or Saxa Vord instead of Nevada would it come in for as much stick?
The roster is set at a responsible level to allow the crew to remain alert throughout their period of duty. I know most people in theatre are working long shifts and certainly the FJ guys get less than 3 days off in 9, but that is the year round working routine at Nellis. Deployed crews step up their work rate OOA as much as those moving onto a 12 hour shift pattern.
Certainly the fast and pointy jets in theatre can't achieve anywhere near the same persistence or extended levels of concentration the Predator can. Sure the chairs are more Barkerlounger than Maritn-Baker but it is the fact that operating conditions are less arduous that allows for longer operating hours without fatigue. The fast jet boys and girls do a fantastic job day in day out providing the effects required, kinetic or otherwise, but with the best will in the world they can’t maintain true round the clock operations. UAVs currently compliment, not replace, traditional manned aircraft in a variety of airpower roles and judging by our protracted procurement system will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.
Should UAV aircrew get recognition for endurance and remotely getting weapons on target? No, no more so than anyone should get an honour for just doing their job. However, where do you draw the line between your job and going above and beyond? When tasked on a high priority/high risk mission are you just doing your job? If the V force had ever launched knowing they would never return would they all have got VCs for “most conspicuous bravery, or some daring or pre-eminent act of valour or self-sacrifice, or extreme devotion to duty in the presence of the enemy?” Or were they just doing their job? Yes, I am being slightly facetious but why can’t a UAV pilot show “devotion to duty whilst flying in active operations against the enemy?” But your not flying I hear you all cry but as I previously stated, currently a UAV can no more fly and operate effectively without a crew than a manned aircraft can. Ok then, could a UAV pilot operating from another aircraft (http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/EquipmentAndLogistics/PilotlessPassengerJetFlownRemotelyByRafInWorldFirst.htm) be eligible for a DFC for guiding their UAV to defend pinned down troops in some corner of a foreign field? They may well receive recognition if they programmed a relatively dumb GPS guided bomb to strike the target, so why not for controlling a more sophisticated weapon system to do the same task? So why not if that weapon system was controlled via a satellite link from another airborne asset operating hundreds of miles away? So why not if that weapon system was operated by an unstressed crew in an air-conditioned, 1g environment with full situational awareness of the developing battle, comms with those on the ground, all the worlds int available at the click of a mouse button, access to advisors on LoAC and RoE and (firmly tongue in cheek) a Starbucks round the corner? You don’t have to suffer yourself to make a big difference to others.
I must agree though that it would be impossible for a UAV crew to be awarded a medal for valour as there just isn’t the mortal danger to be overcome. VCs are therefore out of the question but I don’t believe that other awards should be ruled out merely on grounds of remoteness.
Finally I’m not on a UK UAV posting but I do have a healthy interest in an expanding capability within the RAF. The future is coming and not everyone likes the way it looks but that won’t change it. UAVs give us the capability to do the job without risking lives unnecessarily, is that such a bad thing? Many of those who chose/are chosen to do the job have flown on operations in FJ/AT/AH/SH and will return there after their tour. Should they be vilified for the decision to contribute effectively and for a prolonged period to UK operations? Or should they not have the possibility of being recognized for their efforts?
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Shefford, Beds, UK
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JusT - agree with what you say.
The Distinguished Flying Cross is a prestigious decoration that ranks just behind the Silver Star as a valor medal. It is awarded for heroism or extraordinary achievement.
The Air Medal is awarded for heroism, outstanding achievement or meritorious service. It ranks behind the Bronze Star, but in front of the Army Commendation Medal.
Ivan Rogov
Quote: You seem to be suggesting that UAV operators should get extra recognition for endurance and remotely getting weapons on target, isn't that the job?
How many of those dropping SS during TELIC were given an award?
All they did was take off, go to a drop point (well away from defences), release and RTB - where's the personal risk - or was it an award for outstanding achievement or meritorious service
Don't get too wrapped around the axle of air conditioning and swivel chairs, the real issue is the technical competence of the pilot, sensor operators and analysts to provide the desired effect at the desired time.
BTW - When persistence is taken into account, how many GR4/9s would it take to conduct a continuous 24hr mission?
The Distinguished Flying Cross is a prestigious decoration that ranks just behind the Silver Star as a valor medal. It is awarded for heroism or extraordinary achievement.
The Air Medal is awarded for heroism, outstanding achievement or meritorious service. It ranks behind the Bronze Star, but in front of the Army Commendation Medal.
Ivan Rogov
Quote: You seem to be suggesting that UAV operators should get extra recognition for endurance and remotely getting weapons on target, isn't that the job?
How many of those dropping SS during TELIC were given an award?
All they did was take off, go to a drop point (well away from defences), release and RTB - where's the personal risk - or was it an award for outstanding achievement or meritorious service
Don't get too wrapped around the axle of air conditioning and swivel chairs, the real issue is the technical competence of the pilot, sensor operators and analysts to provide the desired effect at the desired time.
BTW - When persistence is taken into account, how many GR4/9s would it take to conduct a continuous 24hr mission?
"The INTRODUCER"
Poll result
We asked this question on the Flight poll at the end of last year. For the record, here's the result:
Should US-based operators of unmanned air vehicles that are flying in Afghanistan receive campaign medals?
YES, THEY'RE STILL IN COMBAT.
25%
NO, THERE'S NO JUSTIFICATION.
75%
Total Votes: 803
Poll ended on: 10 November 2006
Should US-based operators of unmanned air vehicles that are flying in Afghanistan receive campaign medals?
YES, THEY'RE STILL IN COMBAT.
25%
NO, THERE'S NO JUSTIFICATION.
75%
Total Votes: 803
Poll ended on: 10 November 2006
He's still a hero....
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Somerset
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well one good thing I always thought about our forces was that we didn't get medals for nothing. In 13 years I didn't get a single one and do I feel bitter about that? No I don't - no-one ever tried to kill me. I recall bombing comps with our US mates where there were guys who were just out of training and had a full row of ribbons on there tunic (passing out of training got a medal FFS). I and most of my colleagues just thought it was silly, and I still do. Sitting in an ISO and doing a grand job protecting the troops - yeah, hats off. Medal for bravery though - do me a favour!
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JustT –
Interesting point on the crew mix for the RAF MQ-9s, I believe they wanted FJ experience (Skill and SA?) to reduce the risk of loosing an airframe, time will tell. I think it’s obvious why they would want ISTAR chaps on an ISTAR asset. Are our crews over qualified? Who do the US crew Predator with, what are thier backgrounds?
My conclusion on selection of the MQ-9 is that our Chiefs have put us in a position where we lack ISTAR through bad planning (Partly by cutting existing assets), we urgently need extra ISTAR, when they asked how the problem could be solved the answer probably came back saying we want Predator ASAP. But too many Wheels got involved, and in classic UK Procurement style instead of buying more of the established, lower cost, less risk MQ-1, they end up buying less of the new, expensive, unproven MQ-9 which are likely to suffer delays and set backs, quite a risk when you only have 2 (It’s only just coming into service with the US!)
In no way was I giving the Predator program any “stick”, I think the 1115flt exchange is one of the most positive things the RAF has done in the last decade.
Why would individuals be vilified on return to the UK? They can be recognized like anyone else if their efforts merit it, I would say there are many other postings which contribute effectively for prolonged periods which are much lower profile with less chance of recognition and none of the possible advantages.
I’m not against crews getting the appropriate medals for exceptional work, it was the criteria you mentioned for the DFC which I disagreed with. Anyone else ever been on Ops where the DetCom seems to gets one for FA? I don’t think it would be correct to get the theatre medals unless you are physically present, in my opinion it should be clear which medals apply to potential of physical harm to the individual and which recognise exceptional work. Are all medal criteria clear or do they need clarifying as technology advances?
UAVs certainly have an increasingly important part to play as technology evolves, current compromises in thier design for payload, speed, endurance, manoeuvrability, etc. and the massive amount of bandwidth needed to operate each one limit their current use and investment has to be measured against what they can really offer not just the sales pitch. They are not always the only option or first choice for some of our current missions.
Interesting point on the crew mix for the RAF MQ-9s, I believe they wanted FJ experience (Skill and SA?) to reduce the risk of loosing an airframe, time will tell. I think it’s obvious why they would want ISTAR chaps on an ISTAR asset. Are our crews over qualified? Who do the US crew Predator with, what are thier backgrounds?
My conclusion on selection of the MQ-9 is that our Chiefs have put us in a position where we lack ISTAR through bad planning (Partly by cutting existing assets), we urgently need extra ISTAR, when they asked how the problem could be solved the answer probably came back saying we want Predator ASAP. But too many Wheels got involved, and in classic UK Procurement style instead of buying more of the established, lower cost, less risk MQ-1, they end up buying less of the new, expensive, unproven MQ-9 which are likely to suffer delays and set backs, quite a risk when you only have 2 (It’s only just coming into service with the US!)
In no way was I giving the Predator program any “stick”, I think the 1115flt exchange is one of the most positive things the RAF has done in the last decade.
Why would individuals be vilified on return to the UK? They can be recognized like anyone else if their efforts merit it, I would say there are many other postings which contribute effectively for prolonged periods which are much lower profile with less chance of recognition and none of the possible advantages.
I’m not against crews getting the appropriate medals for exceptional work, it was the criteria you mentioned for the DFC which I disagreed with. Anyone else ever been on Ops where the DetCom seems to gets one for FA? I don’t think it would be correct to get the theatre medals unless you are physically present, in my opinion it should be clear which medals apply to potential of physical harm to the individual and which recognise exceptional work. Are all medal criteria clear or do they need clarifying as technology advances?
UAVs certainly have an increasingly important part to play as technology evolves, current compromises in thier design for payload, speed, endurance, manoeuvrability, etc. and the massive amount of bandwidth needed to operate each one limit their current use and investment has to be measured against what they can really offer not just the sales pitch. They are not always the only option or first choice for some of our current missions.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Creech
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ivan et al,
Remember the MQ-1 is an ISTAR platform that has a strike capability, whereas the MQ-9 is a Strike platform that has an ISTAR capability. You might find that your RAF bought the latter for good reason.
We employ sensor operators who utilise and manage the sensors (obviously), and the pilot (being commissioned) holds the hammer on ROE, captaincy and weapon release authorisation etc. - Our sensor ops are mainly snr airmen, whereas your RAF, I believe will use very experienced aircrew for the right seat (and for good reason I might add). Such experience is invaluable.
BTW, FAA requires a rated PILOT to captain the air vehicle in FAA airspace - hence we do not allow Joe Grunt to 'fly' it. Fare paying public deserve such airspace sharing.
Remember the MQ-1 is an ISTAR platform that has a strike capability, whereas the MQ-9 is a Strike platform that has an ISTAR capability. You might find that your RAF bought the latter for good reason.
We employ sensor operators who utilise and manage the sensors (obviously), and the pilot (being commissioned) holds the hammer on ROE, captaincy and weapon release authorisation etc. - Our sensor ops are mainly snr airmen, whereas your RAF, I believe will use very experienced aircrew for the right seat (and for good reason I might add). Such experience is invaluable.
BTW, FAA requires a rated PILOT to captain the air vehicle in FAA airspace - hence we do not allow Joe Grunt to 'fly' it. Fare paying public deserve such airspace sharing.
Whilst the 'observability' of the MQ-9 is doubtless classified, anything which chugs along at 70 KIAS and 25000ft would be pretty easy meat for an enemy with nothing more sophisticated than a few old Strikemasters, surely?
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Creech
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I didn't think anyone would wish to utilise them as a first strike option, but they might be handy in cleaning the mess after all forces mix it in the aftermarth. Kinda helps a little in the fog of war - me hopes. Have you seen a 'rover' laptop?
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pred B,
I don’t think the RAF brought it for strike, the UK urgently needs more ISTAR. They might hope to use the strike capability but the UK already has strike assets available. Isn't this supposed to be a short term fix until UK UAV programs mature in 20??, otherwise we might as well cancell them an buy more Bs (Which I would agree with)
I think you are correct about our crews experience (Probably a good idea with only have 2) but it goes against some of the major justifications for UAVs, i.e: cost and training. I agree that UK UAV drivers should be pilots and also RAF (The Army just don’t appreciate airspace issues) but they don’t need training to FJ standard (MQ-9 max AOB of 30 degrees or so and +/- 1000ft min?) maybe more PPL+ and in depth training on airspace, etc. There could even be a case for NCO pilots, after all it all comes down to cost.
AFAIK Pred B does much better than 25k ft @ 70kts, but is it really a strike platform with an ISTAR capability, and not the other way round? I have heard it described as having F16 like capability, but I think that is just the sales pitch, the problem with new toys is they are always over hyped. Now UCAV is (was) what I would call strike, but that capability is a few years if not decades away.
Quote -
I didn't think anyone would wish to utilise them as a first strike option, but they might be handy in cleaning the mess after all forces mix it in the aftermarth. Kinda helps a little in the fog of war - me hopes. Have you seen a 'rover' laptop?
Well you want ISTAR to clear up the fog of war not strike. Yes I have seen Rover laptop it doesn’t only use UAVs .
Sorry if I have deviated from the thread a bit, I will stop now and get a life
I don’t think the RAF brought it for strike, the UK urgently needs more ISTAR. They might hope to use the strike capability but the UK already has strike assets available. Isn't this supposed to be a short term fix until UK UAV programs mature in 20??, otherwise we might as well cancell them an buy more Bs (Which I would agree with)
I think you are correct about our crews experience (Probably a good idea with only have 2) but it goes against some of the major justifications for UAVs, i.e: cost and training. I agree that UK UAV drivers should be pilots and also RAF (The Army just don’t appreciate airspace issues) but they don’t need training to FJ standard (MQ-9 max AOB of 30 degrees or so and +/- 1000ft min?) maybe more PPL+ and in depth training on airspace, etc. There could even be a case for NCO pilots, after all it all comes down to cost.
AFAIK Pred B does much better than 25k ft @ 70kts, but is it really a strike platform with an ISTAR capability, and not the other way round? I have heard it described as having F16 like capability, but I think that is just the sales pitch, the problem with new toys is they are always over hyped. Now UCAV is (was) what I would call strike, but that capability is a few years if not decades away.
Quote -
I didn't think anyone would wish to utilise them as a first strike option, but they might be handy in cleaning the mess after all forces mix it in the aftermarth. Kinda helps a little in the fog of war - me hopes. Have you seen a 'rover' laptop?
Well you want ISTAR to clear up the fog of war not strike. Yes I have seen Rover laptop it doesn’t only use UAVs .
Sorry if I have deviated from the thread a bit, I will stop now and get a life
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
$59M for 4, that's a very good deal. At that price maybe we should bin the UK UAV projects and get some more?
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...uavs/index.php
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...uavs/index.php
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: soon a not so old british puppet
Age: 42
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The US Army doesnt award air medals to UAS operators nor flight pay, we do recieve a crew members aviation badge. WE DONT FLY FROM NEVADA, WE FLY FROM IRAQ AND AFGHANISTON. Im a NCO not an Officer and came from a communications background served for 7 years and going on 30 months in iraq and retrained into Aviation due to the need of NCOs for the massive UAS expansion in the US army and at the end of my training for the I-gnat will have gone through 12 months of training and hundreds of flight hours. Its not unheard of for a soldier to get 2000+ flight hours in Iraq. Im just glad were finally sticking it to the Air Farce with the Warrior since they cant support us, and havent since Korea and WW2. I could care less about Medals all i care about is supporting the Infantry Soldier/Marine regardless of nationality.
Well if its medals for all on the basis of supporting the effort does that mean that all those poor barstewards down the bunker on the Ops Teams various at PJHQ (been there, done that) will finally get the recognition for their work?
And to think that MOD saw UAVs as a spend to save measure as they wouldn't have to pay for all the routine honours and awards anymore
And to think that MOD saw UAVs as a spend to save measure as they wouldn't have to pay for all the routine honours and awards anymore
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: London
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If we're only giving medals for bravery, then does that mean we can't give any to assets that don't wander sausage side. Not overly familiar with current ops, but I guess in past events that would have ruled out the tanker boys and the E3 crews.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,131
Received 27 Likes
on
16 Posts
Indeed, haven't a few VC10 crews gone a little above and beyond the stereotype to get bombing aircraft closer to their targets?