Chuck Yeager dislikes the British
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Perth - Western Australia
Age: 75
Posts: 1,805
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re the "overpaid" reference. I seem to recall the bitterness by the Tommies in WW1, towards the Diggers, as regards pay.
The Aussies were well-paid for the era (6 shillings a day - as compared to I think it was around a shilling, or a shilling and sixpence, for the Tommies.)
As a result, the Tommies coined the term for the Diggers - "Six-bob-a-day tourists", with the accompanying ill-feeling.
As Danny42C says, the pay grievances are more to do with a British Govt that was miserly in the extreme - and always seems to have been, as regards their servicemen.
The Aussies were well-paid for the era (6 shillings a day - as compared to I think it was around a shilling, or a shilling and sixpence, for the Tommies.)
As a result, the Tommies coined the term for the Diggers - "Six-bob-a-day tourists", with the accompanying ill-feeling.
As Danny42C says, the pay grievances are more to do with a British Govt that was miserly in the extreme - and always seems to have been, as regards their servicemen.
Last edited by onetrack; 7th Oct 2016 at 11:36.
a British Govt that was miserly in the extreme - and always seems to have been, as regards their servicemen.
Probably about 40 years ago, BBC Panorama did programme about Americans based in East Anglia. They interviewed one old Codger and asked him what he thought of the Americans. For his answer he described an incident when a US airman was standing on the corner of the street eating fish and chips in the traditional way. Seeing that his private parts were exposed a local policeman accused him of being improperly dressed. The airman looked down and said "Oh. She's gone has she?".
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Quote:
Originally Posted by charliegolf
Douglas Bader wasn't the nicest chap a person could meet. Allegedly!
I could personally discount the "allegedly", but maybe I got him on a bad day!
"
Must have been the same two days I met him.... irritable didn't really cover the situation...........
Originally Posted by charliegolf
Douglas Bader wasn't the nicest chap a person could meet. Allegedly!
I could personally discount the "allegedly", but maybe I got him on a bad day!
"Must have been the same two days I met him.... irritable didn't really cover the situation...........
Last edited by Heathrow Harry; 7th Oct 2016 at 11:22.
Westie, you're dead right about Bob Hoover! Didn't he once take on the FAA and win? I saw him display the Shrike Commander at Paris in 1969 - simply stunning!
As for Yeager, why couldn't he just have sent a little note up to the flight deck to say "That was nice of you, Captain, but actually I prefer to travel incognito".
No doubt the flight attendants made sure that he wasn't given any special treatment from then on.... At least, none about which he might have been aware
Chaps, generalising about WW2 experiences is hardly fair, given the large number of guests who made the hazardous journey across the pond to help kick Adolf's ar$e. In any case, when you get people in groups of 9 or more, they can be rather a pain - just look at the Reds
! But comments about a certain fighter pilot and also the famous bomber pilot with the unpleasant dog are, I gather, on the money!
As for Yeager, why couldn't he just have sent a little note up to the flight deck to say "That was nice of you, Captain, but actually I prefer to travel incognito".
No doubt the flight attendants made sure that he wasn't given any special treatment from then on.... At least, none about which he might have been aware
Chaps, generalising about WW2 experiences is hardly fair, given the large number of guests who made the hazardous journey across the pond to help kick Adolf's ar$e. In any case, when you get people in groups of 9 or more, they can be rather a pain - just look at the Reds
! But comments about a certain fighter pilot and also the famous bomber pilot with the unpleasant dog are, I gather, on the money!
Gnome de PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,634
Received 300 Likes
on
168 Posts
Westie, you're dead right about Bob Hoover! Didn't he once take on the FAA and win?
Not quite, The FAA took on Bob Hoover and lost!
Saw Yeager fly a P-51 at Oshkosh once, not sure he actually knows how to smile. His WWII squadron mate Bud Anderson flew another Mustang on his wing, that man was very clearly enjoying himself. Hoover's the same, saw him fly his Shrike at Reno, huge grin after he landed!
'Fighting the war for us'? Like hell. Moreover, read up about Lease-lend. The US lent us ships & aeroplanes. Thank you. But they were only lent to us. After the war we had to give them back. Trouble is, the obsolete ancient warships had sunk and many aircraft were shot down. So we had to mortgage GB up to the hilt to pay back the USA for all what we had 'lost'. No wonder big business in the USA got very rich out of WW2 and we got very poor. They were smart and we were desperate.
Last edited by sharpend; 7th Oct 2016 at 19:58.
Say what you like about Yeager, I don't know, but he is almost saintlike in the USA. In 1993 I went to see the Indy 500 and the pre-race flypast was 5 x P51s led by Yeager. To a man 470,000 Americans stood and cheered, I'd be surprised if he didn't hear it.
The same 470,000 also stood and cheered Nigel Mansell when he went from 6th to 1st with a perfectly timed run following a safety car restart, but that's another story about another awkward ace.
The same 470,000 also stood and cheered Nigel Mansell when he went from 6th to 1st with a perfectly timed run following a safety car restart, but that's another story about another awkward ace.
Nigel an awkward ace, The Oberon ?
Nah, lovely chap. Down to earth “Midlander”. Totally focussed - probably like CY - and with a similar education I feel.
Nothing wrong with these blokes. Just a different attitude to their careers which they were both very fortunate to achieve…….
Once met NM in the lounge at Heathrow in the 80s. I was deadheading and he was on his way back to the IOM. He’d just been to give a presentation to Durex for some funding. Laughing his socks off, he was, that they hadn’t got it and so he wouldn’t have to have the logo on his car ! …..and so pleased to have some company during his delay.
The “allegedly” "famous fighter ace" was a different situation.
I was in his presence at RAF Gaydon years ago when I was a cadet. Having patiently waited, I wanted just to shake the hand of a bloke who had been my hero since about the age of 7. I was in uniform and politely asked if this could be so. Without a word, he looked down with a frown and turned his back !
Since then I have been fortunate enough to be introduced to a good few, renowned aviation “legends”. For example, Ray Hanna was never like that. Nor Geoffrey Quill. Nor Neville Duke. Nor our own JF. All these were confident gentlemen, comfortable in their own shoes, who were all too willing to encourage young whippersnappers like me. It doesn’t take much effort.
Nah, lovely chap. Down to earth “Midlander”. Totally focussed - probably like CY - and with a similar education I feel.
Nothing wrong with these blokes. Just a different attitude to their careers which they were both very fortunate to achieve…….
Once met NM in the lounge at Heathrow in the 80s. I was deadheading and he was on his way back to the IOM. He’d just been to give a presentation to Durex for some funding. Laughing his socks off, he was, that they hadn’t got it and so he wouldn’t have to have the logo on his car ! …..and so pleased to have some company during his delay.
The “allegedly” "famous fighter ace" was a different situation.
I was in his presence at RAF Gaydon years ago when I was a cadet. Having patiently waited, I wanted just to shake the hand of a bloke who had been my hero since about the age of 7. I was in uniform and politely asked if this could be so. Without a word, he looked down with a frown and turned his back !
Since then I have been fortunate enough to be introduced to a good few, renowned aviation “legends”. For example, Ray Hanna was never like that. Nor Geoffrey Quill. Nor Neville Duke. Nor our own JF. All these were confident gentlemen, comfortable in their own shoes, who were all too willing to encourage young whippersnappers like me. It doesn’t take much effort.
Gentleman Aviator
All these were confident gentlemen, comfortable in their own shoes, who were all too willing to encourage young whippersnappers like me. It doesn’t take much effort.
Had the privilege of sharing a glass or two of red with him a few years ago. Don't think I qualified as a "young whippersnapper" even then, although he was 30 years and about 12,000 hours my senior! Still find it amazing that I had a drink with someone who debriefed Hermann G just before he topped himself, and had his first flight courtesy of Ernst Udet........
ISTR he - Winkle - did a tour at Pax River on the 50s. Must have met Yeager - wonder what HE thought of him....
Last edited by teeteringhead; 8th Oct 2016 at 07:28.
Yeager is well balanced...with a chip on each shoulder.
Perhaps that is part of the reason so many Brits take exception to the Man as they cannot tolerate competition.
I always heard the Brits during the War were under paid, under sexed, and under Eisenhower!
Heading to the bunker in anticipation of some "Oh Yeah's!".
Perhaps that is part of the reason so many Brits take exception to the Man as they cannot tolerate competition.
I always heard the Brits during the War were under paid, under sexed, and under Eisenhower!
Heading to the bunker in anticipation of some "Oh Yeah's!".
Guest
Posts: n/a
sharpend (#99),
It wasn't quite as bad as that. At the end in India I had three Vultee Vengeance Mk.III (so all Lend-Lease) on inventory.
Then there were three options for our LL aircraft:
(a) Anything the US wanted (eg: Daks - refitted as DC-3s would be the mainstay of immediate post war civil aviation for years to come) had to be handed back.
(b) Anything we wanted to keep, we must pay for (at a heavily discounted price).
(c) The rest must be completely destroyed, so that no part of them (eg cockpit instruments) could come on the market to compete with US sales.
I'm fairly sure we were not charged for battle or accident "write-offs" ! - that would've been a "bit much".
Wiki says:
"....The terms of the agreement provided that the materiel was to be used until returned or destroyed. In practice very little equipment was returned...."
I would assume we bought all the RAF's postwar Daks under option (b).
Danny.
It wasn't quite as bad as that. At the end in India I had three Vultee Vengeance Mk.III (so all Lend-Lease) on inventory.
Then there were three options for our LL aircraft:
(a) Anything the US wanted (eg: Daks - refitted as DC-3s would be the mainstay of immediate post war civil aviation for years to come) had to be handed back.
(b) Anything we wanted to keep, we must pay for (at a heavily discounted price).
(c) The rest must be completely destroyed, so that no part of them (eg cockpit instruments) could come on the market to compete with US sales.
I'm fairly sure we were not charged for battle or accident "write-offs" ! - that would've been a "bit much".
Wiki says:
"....The terms of the agreement provided that the materiel was to be used until returned or destroyed. In practice very little equipment was returned...."
I would assume we bought all the RAF's postwar Daks under option (b).
Danny.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: UK
Age: 78
Posts: 389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't like the Brits
Do not be sad that this man doesn't like us
That is what the British are for
Our function is to be not liked, without us it would have to be someone else
That is what the British are for
Our function is to be not liked, without us it would have to be someone else
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 57
Posts: 2,438
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bob Hoover
Now there is an ambassador for US military aviation along with just being the personification of class.
Now there is an ambassador for US military aviation along with just being the personification of class.
That is what the British are for
Our function is to be not liked, without us it would have to be someone else
Our function is to be not liked, without us it would have to be someone else
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Doncaster
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think the big yank has forgiven us for all the advance aerodynamic secrets they stole from the brits before the X1 did her M1 flight. I can't blame him for that.... still it's a bad show, but what can you expect from a yank.
the pay grievances are more to do with a British Govt that was miserly in the extreme - and always seems to have been, as regards their servicemen.
Our Lord and Master at that time was Harold Wilson and he decreed that every British serviceman had to proceed to an Sovereign Base Area, which meant that they were technically outside the Republic of Cyprus, before that thirty days, to ensure that they were not entitled to UN pay.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Met Gus Walker before I knew his story.
Met Harry Bendorf as a mere major.
Both good guys.
Met Harry Bendorf as a mere major.
Both good guys.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,037
Received 2,914 Likes
on
1,247 Posts
Fighting the war for us'? Like hell. Moreover, read up about Lease-lend. The US lent us ships & aeroplanes. Thank you. But they were only lent to us. After the war we had to give them back. Trouble is, the obsolete ancient warships had sunk and many aircraft were shot down. So we had to mortgage GB up to the hilt to pay back the USA for all what we had 'lost'. No wonder big business in the USA got very rich out of WW2 and we got very poor. They were smart and we were desperate.
https://history.state.gov/milestones...945/lend-lease
On September 2, 1940, as the Battle of Britain intensified, United States Secretary of State Cordell Hull signaled agreement to the transfer of the warships to the Royal Navy. In exchange, the US was granted land in various British possessions for the establishment of naval or air bases, on ninety-nine-year rent-free leases, on:
Newfoundland (today part of the Canadian province of Newfoundland and Labrador)
Eastern side of the Bahamas
Southern coast of Jamaica
Western coast of St. Lucia
West coast of Trinidad (Gulf of Paria)
Antigua
British Guiana (present day Guyana) within fifty miles of Georgetown
The agreement also granted the US air and naval base rights in:
The Great Sound and Castle Harbour, Bermuda
South and eastern coasts of Newfoundland
No destroyers were received in exchange for the bases in Bermuda and Newfoundland. Both territories were vital to trans-Atlantic shipping, aviation, and to the Battle of the Atlantic. Although enemy attack on either was unlikely, it could not be discounted, and Britain had been forced to wastefully maintain defensive forces, including the Bermuda Garrison. The deal allowed Britain to hand much of the defence of Bermuda over to the still-neutral US, freeing British forces for redeployment to more active theatres. It also enabled the development of strategic facilities at US expense which British forces would also utilise.
Newfoundland (today part of the Canadian province of Newfoundland and Labrador)
Eastern side of the Bahamas
Southern coast of Jamaica
Western coast of St. Lucia
West coast of Trinidad (Gulf of Paria)
Antigua
British Guiana (present day Guyana) within fifty miles of Georgetown
The agreement also granted the US air and naval base rights in:
The Great Sound and Castle Harbour, Bermuda
South and eastern coasts of Newfoundland
No destroyers were received in exchange for the bases in Bermuda and Newfoundland. Both territories were vital to trans-Atlantic shipping, aviation, and to the Battle of the Atlantic. Although enemy attack on either was unlikely, it could not be discounted, and Britain had been forced to wastefully maintain defensive forces, including the Bermuda Garrison. The deal allowed Britain to hand much of the defence of Bermuda over to the still-neutral US, freeing British forces for redeployment to more active theatres. It also enabled the development of strategic facilities at US expense which British forces would also utilise.