Woman Hawg driver
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,131
Received 27 Likes
on
16 Posts
Hey a Pinckney girl! My Grandad taught me to play ice hockey on Portage Lake, right around the corner from Pinckney.
Thread Starter
Danny - I hail from the land of the long white cloud.
But the better place is the west island - bigger, better weather.
Although when it comes to rugby - I bleed black!
Pax - I suspect you're right.
The oils in makeup and oxygen would be a safety hazard I'd imagine.
But the better place is the west island - bigger, better weather.
Although when it comes to rugby - I bleed black!
Pax - I suspect you're right.
The oils in makeup and oxygen would be a safety hazard I'd imagine.
Guest
Posts: n/a
The Female of the Species is more dangerous than the Male.
megan (your #16)
Here is a copy of another of my Posts which is relevant to this story (15.1.15 p.334 #6670). Unfortunately I cannot trace it back to the Post referred to:
The twist to the story was, of course, that the crew were two ladies (I understand that the WSO [?] is now CO of a FJ Sqn). This was not mentioned in my original post as it was irrelevant - the problem was the ROE.
What do you suppose Major Campbell would have done under those circumstances ? Are the USAF ROEs the same ?
Danny.
megan,
Not seen a copy of the Report, but this was discussed a long time ago on "Pilot's Brevet" (reference not to hand, but could be dug up). He was rather disparaging of the VV, reckoning that the Stuka was superior as a dive bomber, inasmuch as the Stuka could be dived vertically, whereas the VV could not (which is the reverse of the fact). We concluded that he was given a Mk. IV (A-35) to test, in which case he may well have been right. As I never flew a Mk. IV, I am not an authority on them.
Unless the report says anything more, don't send a copy - but thanks all the same !
Danny.
...Also a story of a female crew plinking with their F-14 cannon on Bora Bora when that was all the go...
...(Copied from another of my Posts on another Thread)
My eye was caught by this link:
(Extract D.Tel. 9.1.15).
"The pair have said that one of their proudest moments to date involved helping to foil a rocket (RPG ?) attack on their base at Kandahar airfield in 2010".
"There was a high threat and the base was expecting an imminent attack after some men were spotted in a nearby ditch, setting up to fire a rocket (RPG ?) at their accommodation block".
"They took the aircraft out to 15 miles from their position in the ditch and came down to low level, approaching at more than 500mph and as close to the Operational Low Flying minimum of 100 feet as possible, passing directly over them before heading into a steep climb".
"The rocket crew immediately scarpered in a truck and the pair felt they had made a tangible difference to protect their colleagues".
“The intention is to always use the minimum force required to provide the effect needed by the guys on the ground".
Am I missing something here ? This was in 2010, and there was a war going on in Afghanistan (as we have 453 good reasons to remember). This is the enemy, and he is making ready to kill you (or some of your comrades) if he can. You are airborne in one of the RAF's most powerful weapons. You have a 27mm cannon.
You buzz him off (as I used to shift a flock of goats off my strip before landing).
So that he can come back later and try again ?
I am a simple soul. Can someone please explain this to me (after all, my war was 70 years ago, and things change).
Danny.
Afterthought 1: I have my grandfather's India General Service Medal (with a clasp for Kandahar !) Nothing changes !
Afterthought 2: Radio a day or two ago reports that the Afghan Premier has appointed a Taliban General as Governer of the Helmand Province (If true, you couldn't invent it). D...
My eye was caught by this link:
(Extract D.Tel. 9.1.15).
"The pair have said that one of their proudest moments to date involved helping to foil a rocket (RPG ?) attack on their base at Kandahar airfield in 2010".
"There was a high threat and the base was expecting an imminent attack after some men were spotted in a nearby ditch, setting up to fire a rocket (RPG ?) at their accommodation block".
"They took the aircraft out to 15 miles from their position in the ditch and came down to low level, approaching at more than 500mph and as close to the Operational Low Flying minimum of 100 feet as possible, passing directly over them before heading into a steep climb".
"The rocket crew immediately scarpered in a truck and the pair felt they had made a tangible difference to protect their colleagues".
“The intention is to always use the minimum force required to provide the effect needed by the guys on the ground".
Am I missing something here ? This was in 2010, and there was a war going on in Afghanistan (as we have 453 good reasons to remember). This is the enemy, and he is making ready to kill you (or some of your comrades) if he can. You are airborne in one of the RAF's most powerful weapons. You have a 27mm cannon.
You buzz him off (as I used to shift a flock of goats off my strip before landing).
So that he can come back later and try again ?
I am a simple soul. Can someone please explain this to me (after all, my war was 70 years ago, and things change).
Danny.
Afterthought 1: I have my grandfather's India General Service Medal (with a clasp for Kandahar !) Nothing changes !
Afterthought 2: Radio a day or two ago reports that the Afghan Premier has appointed a Taliban General as Governer of the Helmand Province (If true, you couldn't invent it). D...
What do you suppose Major Campbell would have done under those circumstances ? Are the USAF ROEs the same ?
Danny.
megan,
Not seen a copy of the Report, but this was discussed a long time ago on "Pilot's Brevet" (reference not to hand, but could be dug up). He was rather disparaging of the VV, reckoning that the Stuka was superior as a dive bomber, inasmuch as the Stuka could be dived vertically, whereas the VV could not (which is the reverse of the fact). We concluded that he was given a Mk. IV (A-35) to test, in which case he may well have been right. As I never flew a Mk. IV, I am not an authority on them.
Unless the report says anything more, don't send a copy - but thanks all the same !
Danny.
Last edited by Danny42C; 19th Jun 2016 at 13:26. Reason: Addn.
The twist to the story was, of course, that the crew were two ladies (I understand that the WSO [?] is now CO of a FJ Sqn). This was not mentioned in my original post as it was irrelevant - the problem was the ROE.
What do you suppose Major Campbell would have done under those circumstances ? Are the USAF ROEs the same ?
What do you suppose Major Campbell would have done under those circumstances ? Are the USAF ROEs the same ?
Making a lot of this more difficult is how close some targets are to things/people our side does not want hit. (Note the savage noise after that air strike that hit a hospital (that was reported by the local Afgh ground commander as being a fighting position) recently). The fallout of press/media/information/propaganda goes into the formulation of RoE and from my recollection nobody in a civilian suit cares that it makes it more difficult and complex for those fighting. "You're the professionals, make it work." It didn't matter what party of political 'side' the final RoE approvals came from. "Don't make me look bad on CNN" is the prime directive from the political leadership.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Lonewolf 50,
Granted - (and the power of the 'meeja" is truly enormous), but who in his right mind could deny that this was a 100%, copper-bottomed, gold-plated military target ? Do not Daesh (or whatever we're supposed to call them now) run around today with artillery on the backs of Toyota pick-ups ?
And was this not a Clear and Present Danger to our troops in Kandahar ? If we're not to use lethal force on them in a case like this, then what are we doing there at all ?
This old mind boggles (it were different when I were a lad).
Danny.
Granted - (and the power of the 'meeja" is truly enormous), but who in his right mind could deny that this was a 100%, copper-bottomed, gold-plated military target ? Do not Daesh (or whatever we're supposed to call them now) run around today with artillery on the backs of Toyota pick-ups ?
And was this not a Clear and Present Danger to our troops in Kandahar ? If we're not to use lethal force on them in a case like this, then what are we doing there at all ?
This old mind boggles (it were different when I were a lad).
Danny.
My heart is with your sentiments, of course.
And was this not a Clear and Present Danger to our troops in Kandahar ?
If we're not to use lethal force on them in a case like this, then what are we doing there at all ?
- on the approved promotion list for BGen,
- and in a one star billet
aah, what we call "acting unpaid", but if you are discharging the responsibilities of the rank in an appropriate posti you get "acting paid rank" (well you did in my day.....) pending the promotion list being published, which used to be twice yearly, But thanks for taking the trouble to explain
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regarding "frocked" ranks, besides not getting the pay of your frocked rank, your frocked rank does not apply under the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice). So when frocked you can properly wear the insignia, have the title, and fill a billet of the frocked rank, but you are not "legally" at that rank for pay, seniority, or military justice purposes. Hope that helped.
Guest
Posts: n/a
KenV,
Never came across "Frocked" in that sense: there was only Acting (paid) and Acting (unpaid) AFAIK.
Now "Unfrocked" (as of a clergyman) has a clear derivation. He/Her has the right to wear the vestments of the Office withdrawn. Suppose "Frocked" has the opposite meaning as used here.
Danny42C..
Never came across "Frocked" in that sense: there was only Acting (paid) and Acting (unpaid) AFAIK.
Now "Unfrocked" (as of a clergyman) has a clear derivation. He/Her has the right to wear the vestments of the Office withdrawn. Suppose "Frocked" has the opposite meaning as used here.
Danny42C..
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now "Unfrocked" (as of a clergyman) has a clear derivation. He/Her has the right to wear the vestments of the Office withdrawn.