|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
OT - Military Channel
On Sun, 16 Aug 2009 19:44:53 -0500, Pat Flannery
wrote: My main complaint is the selection of "Great Planes". I really wouldn't consider the F-100, A-7, or A-26 "great". I guess after a while you run out of the obvious ones, and end up with choices like that. Except they haven't had very many episodes. They just started Season 2 in July. I checked their website and they do have episodes on the F-15, F-16, and F-18. I haven't seen them, though. Last night, they had an episode about the P-39. Yes, the Bell P-39 Airacobra. A "Great Plane"? I don't think so, and very little of the discussion in the episode supported the "Great Plane" moniker. What's next, the TBD Devastator as a "Great Plane"? Meanwhile, they haven't done an episode on the Spitfire, F4U, SBD, DC-3, B-52, F-86, 707, Lancaster... All three of those aircraft had fairly long and successful operational histories, and the program on the A-26 was interesting to watch, as it's not that well known, and they did cover the A-20 Havoc in the same episode. Yeah, I liked that too. You don't see the Havoc on TV all that often. I had a Monogram model of a Invader as a kid, and frankly didn't have a clue as to what is was or where it came from...it sure didn't look like a Marauder of some sort: http://www.gasolinealleyantiques.com...-p6invader.JPG I had that model, but it was in different box art by the time I bought it in the 70s. Which leaves a good question - why exactly was it later given a "B-26" designation after it had already been used by the Marauder? The Air Force put the A-26 back in service after the Widowmaker, um... I mean Marauder had been retired. By that point, the Air Force had discontinued the A (Attack) designation, so the Invader went back into service under the B-26 designation. When the DoD standardized designations in 1962 or so, "A" was reinstated and the Invader went back to A-26. My favorite "Wings" episode was the one where the B-17 was credited with carrying ten _50 mm_ machine guns, which should have made any German fighter very hesitant about attacking it. I wish they'd re-run Wings somewhere, even if its 3:00am ET. Brian |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
OT - Military Channel
On Sun, 16 Aug 2009 19:44:53 -0500, Pat Flannery
wrote: My main complaint is the selection of "Great Planes". I really wouldn't consider the F-100, A-7, or A-26 "great". I guess after a while you run out of the obvious ones, and end up with choices like that. Except they haven't had very many episodes. They just started Season 2 in July. I checked their website and they do have episodes on the F-15, F-16, and F-18. I haven't seen them, though. Last night, they had an episode about the P-39. Yes, the Bell P-39 Airacobra. A "Great Plane"? I don't think so, and very little of the discussion in the episode supported the "Great Plane" moniker. What's next, the TBD Devastator as a "Great Plane"? Meanwhile, they haven't done an episode on the Spitfire, F4U, SBD, DC-3, B-52, F-86, 707, Lancaster... All three of those aircraft had fairly long and successful operational histories, and the program on the A-26 was interesting to watch, as it's not that well known, and they did cover the A-20 Havoc in the same episode. Yeah, I liked that too. You don't see the Havoc on TV all that often. I had a Monogram model of a Invader as a kid, and frankly didn't have a clue as to what is was or where it came from...it sure didn't look like a Marauder of some sort: http://www.gasolinealleyantiques.com...-p6invader.JPG I had that model, but it was in different box art by the time I bought it in the 70s. Which leaves a good question - why exactly was it later given a "B-26" designation after it had already been used by the Marauder? The Air Force put the A-26 back in service after the Widowmaker, um... I mean Marauder had been retired. By that point, the Air Force had discontinued the A (Attack) designation, so the Invader went back into service under the B-26 designation. When the DoD standardized designations in 1962 or so, "A" was reinstated and the Invader went back to A-26. My favorite "Wings" episode was the one where the B-17 was credited with carrying ten _50 mm_ machine guns, which should have made any German fighter very hesitant about attacking it. I wish they'd re-run Wings somewhere, even if its 3:00am ET. Brian |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
OT - Military Channel
-Joao Silveira- wrote:
On Sun, 16 Aug 2009 19:44:53 -0500, Pat Flannery wrote: and the program on the A-26 was interesting to watch, as it's not that well known, and they did cover the A-20 Havoc in the same episode. Yeah, I liked that too. You don't see the Havoc on TV all that often. Drat - missed that one and would have loved to see it - my father flew an A-20 in Europe. rick jones -- denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance, rebirth... where do you want to be today? these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway... feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH... |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
OT - Military Channel
"Pat Flannery" wrote in message ... Has anyone else noted that The Military Channel (sometimes called "The Hitler Channel" due to its fascination with all things Nazi) You gotta admire what Germany accomplished though back then. The first time I saw a Me-262 in person at the DC Air and Space museum, I was astonished at how modern it looked. It could've been built in the seventies! Then I walk over and look at our first 'jet' looking like a big fat tub that could hardly get off the ground. No contest. has recently demonstrated a program schedule that not only features a lack of new series, but a decided return to program series and episodes from around a decade back? Has "killing people and breaking things" fallen out of fashion again, like it did towards the end of the Vietnam War? Well, at least we still have "Dogfights" and "Battle 360" over on The History Channel, both of which kick ass. Don't even get me started on The Old Gunny and "Lock And Load". Let's just say I have a small shrine in my apartment to R. Lee Ermey with burning cans of whup-ass lighting his photo, and live watermelons being sacrificed on a weekly basis. So, are you going to trust your uneaten wiener to anything less than _real_ Tupperware? Not if you're smart, you full-metal jerk-off! Let's just say that if you do that, the only thing that's likely to suck on it tomorrow is a Hoover vacuum cleaner!: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._Lee_Ermey The secret to personal contentment is in living in the future Pat, not the past. Connecting the past and the present draws a poor line into the future. But imagining the ideal future, then connecting that to the present reality draws a clear, well-defined and joyous path that ...never ends. Pat |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
OT - Military Channel
"Pat Flannery" wrote in message ... Has anyone else noted that The Military Channel (sometimes called "The Hitler Channel" due to its fascination with all things Nazi) You gotta admire what Germany accomplished though back then. The first time I saw a Me-262 in person at the DC Air and Space museum, I was astonished at how modern it looked. It could've been built in the seventies! Then I walk over and look at our first 'jet' looking like a big fat tub that could hardly get off the ground. No contest. has recently demonstrated a program schedule that not only features a lack of new series, but a decided return to program series and episodes from around a decade back? Has "killing people and breaking things" fallen out of fashion again, like it did towards the end of the Vietnam War? Well, at least we still have "Dogfights" and "Battle 360" over on The History Channel, both of which kick ass. Don't even get me started on The Old Gunny and "Lock And Load". Let's just say I have a small shrine in my apartment to R. Lee Ermey with burning cans of whup-ass lighting his photo, and live watermelons being sacrificed on a weekly basis. So, are you going to trust your uneaten wiener to anything less than _real_ Tupperware? Not if you're smart, you full-metal jerk-off! Let's just say that if you do that, the only thing that's likely to suck on it tomorrow is a Hoover vacuum cleaner!: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._Lee_Ermey The secret to personal contentment is in living in the future Pat, not the past. Connecting the past and the present draws a poor line into the future. But imagining the ideal future, then connecting that to the present reality draws a clear, well-defined and joyous path that ...never ends. Pat |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
OT - Military Channel
"Pat Flannery" wrote in message dakotatelephone... Brian Thorn wrote: On Sun, 16 Aug 2009 12:00:16 -0500, Pat Flannery wrote: My main complaint is the selection of "Great Planes". I really wouldn't consider the F-100, A-7, or A-26 "great". I guess after a while you run out of the obvious ones, and end up with choices like that. All three of those aircraft had fairly long and successful operational histories, and the program on the A-26 was interesting to watch, as it's not that well known, and they did cover the A-20 Havoc in the same episode. I had a Monogram model of a Invader as a kid, and frankly didn't have a clue as to what is was or where it came from...it sure didn't look like a Marauder of some sort: http://www.gasolinealleyantiques.com...-p6invader.JPG Which leaves a good question - why exactly was it later given a "B-26" designation after it had already been used by the Marauder? My favorite "Wings" episode was the one where the B-17 was credited with carrying ten _50 mm_ machine guns, which should have made any German fighter very hesitant about attacking it. My dad flew over 70 missions in a B-24, and got a share of exactly one Jap fighter in all that time. I'd rather be in a fighter, a 20mm cannon has a much longer range and destructive power than a fifty. I always wondered how he flew so many missions when I thought 25 was the requirement. Then I paged through his log book, most missions read something like....couldn't find the target....clouds over the target....got lost .....mechanical trouble....too much flak, too many fighters....it took that many to get in 25 'completed' missions. And looking at the pictures of the mud covered runways they had to use in the Pacific theatre, it's a wonder he made it throught 70 take-offs and landings. Let alone missions. Pat |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
OT - Military Channel
"Pat Flannery" wrote in message dakotatelephone... Brian Thorn wrote: On Sun, 16 Aug 2009 12:00:16 -0500, Pat Flannery wrote: My main complaint is the selection of "Great Planes". I really wouldn't consider the F-100, A-7, or A-26 "great". I guess after a while you run out of the obvious ones, and end up with choices like that. All three of those aircraft had fairly long and successful operational histories, and the program on the A-26 was interesting to watch, as it's not that well known, and they did cover the A-20 Havoc in the same episode. I had a Monogram model of a Invader as a kid, and frankly didn't have a clue as to what is was or where it came from...it sure didn't look like a Marauder of some sort: http://www.gasolinealleyantiques.com...-p6invader.JPG Which leaves a good question - why exactly was it later given a "B-26" designation after it had already been used by the Marauder? My favorite "Wings" episode was the one where the B-17 was credited with carrying ten _50 mm_ machine guns, which should have made any German fighter very hesitant about attacking it. My dad flew over 70 missions in a B-24, and got a share of exactly one Jap fighter in all that time. I'd rather be in a fighter, a 20mm cannon has a much longer range and destructive power than a fifty. I always wondered how he flew so many missions when I thought 25 was the requirement. Then I paged through his log book, most missions read something like....couldn't find the target....clouds over the target....got lost .....mechanical trouble....too much flak, too many fighters....it took that many to get in 25 'completed' missions. And looking at the pictures of the mud covered runways they had to use in the Pacific theatre, it's a wonder he made it throught 70 take-offs and landings. Let alone missions. Pat |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
OT - Military Channel
"Rick Jones" wrote in message ... -Joao Silveira- wrote: On Sun, 16 Aug 2009 19:44:53 -0500, Pat Flannery wrote: and the program on the A-26 was interesting to watch, as it's not that well known, and they did cover the A-20 Havoc in the same episode. Yeah, I liked that too. You don't see the Havoc on TV all that often. Drat - missed that one and would have loved to see it - my father flew an A-20 in Europe. At a military show one day I was talking to a M-1 tank driver, and he was bragging to everyone just how indestructable the thing was. Nothing 'they got' he said can take us out. So, like the smart-ass I am, I asked him if it could take an attack from an A-20? He just glared at me, and I could tell what he was thinking. Which was something like "I wonder if the ruskies have anything like an A-20"? s rick jones -- denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance, rebirth... where do you want to be today? these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway... feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH... |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
OT - Military Channel
Dale Carlson wrote:
My dad flew over 70 missions in a B-24, and got a share of exactly one Jap fighter in all that time. I'd rather be in a fighter, a 20mm cannon has a much longer range and destructive power than a fifty. Apart from the previously maligned P-39, were there (m)any WWII-serving US fighters with cannon? I was under the impression they "all" had 50 cals. Hmm, poking around a bit I see that the P-38 had the same 37mm cannon as the P-39 (along with some 50 and 30 cal machine guns). The other "big names" appear to have been machine gun armed. rick jones -- oxymoron n, Hummer H2 with California Save Our Coasts and Oceans plates these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway... feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH... |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
OT - Military Channel
Dave Michelson wrote:
At a military show one day I was talking to a M-1 tank driver, and he was bragging to everyone just how indestructable the thing was. Nothing 'they got' he said can take us out. So, like the smart-ass I am, I asked him if it could take an attack from an A-20? He just glared at me, and I could tell what he was thinking. Which was something like "I wonder if the ruskies have anything like an A-20"? I bet he was thinking it was some sort of upgraded A-10 Warthog/Thunderbolt-II Still, I doubt that what the A-20 carried could take-out a contemporary M-1 (*perhaps* a direct hit with a 1000 pounder, but I cannot recall if the A-20 carried anything bigger than 500's) - now, a Lancaster with a Tallboy... rick jones -- The computing industry isn't as much a game of "Follow The Leader" as it is one of "Ring Around the Rosy" or perhaps "Duck Duck Goose." - Rick Jones these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway... feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH... |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
OT - Military Channel | Pat Flannery | History | 0 | August 15th 09 05:47 AM |
Around the world, organized military forces of governments have manydifferent types of military uniforms that they wear. Clearly being one of thefounding fathers of the uniform, the militaries of countries have contributedgreatly towards what constit | [email protected] | Amateur Astronomy | 0 | April 20th 08 06:44 PM |
GPS and Military Use | Rich Webb | Amateur Astronomy | 0 | August 14th 07 05:47 AM |