It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Elite American Air Force

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 9 2005 @ 01:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by rogue1
The British air force cannot be compared to the US Air Force in terms of statistics. THe USAF has spent far more time in combat than the BRits therefore incidents are bound to occur. Not to mention if the RAF was the size of the USAF then I have no doubt there would ne friendly fire incidents. It is far easier to train and control a vastly smaller air force.


Umm overall I think you might be a bit wrong here. 1914-17 and 1939-42?? Ring any bells.




posted on Mar, 9 2005 @ 07:03 PM
link   
The best trained Airforce in the world isnt the US or the RAF. It sure as hell isnt the French or Germans or even China or Russia. ITs Israel. Even though Israel gets almost all of its planes from the US they actually use them better. When I mean use them better what I mean is if you give a US pilot a 15-C and an Israeli pilot the same plane, take away all the hi-tech stuff and let them have a straight out dog fight the Israeli would win.



posted on Mar, 9 2005 @ 07:30 PM
link   
all this talk about who is better between the US and the Brits is nonsence....... Hell the brits are practically another U.S. state anyhow... it'll prolly be official by the end of this century too.



posted on Mar, 11 2005 @ 07:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Broadsword20068

I disagree. U.S. Marine Corps pilots and Air Force pilots are amongst the most professional people in the world. They do not have any sense of "bravado." These aren't 18 year-olds in aircraft, they're grown men and women with families usually.

It is a very, very few that have come off as bad folk, but the majority have nothing to do with being cowboys in their aircraft.


Maybe.. Im not saying im dead certain...all AF pilots are professionals.. but if one were to rank AFs in terms of % of their pilots being pompous...
The US would win by a longshot... Even though that %age may be a measely 1%



posted on Mar, 11 2005 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Umm overall I think you might be a bit wrong here. 1914-17 and 1939-42?? Ring any bells.


What are you refering to?

[edit on 11/3/05 by Ruled By Secrecy]



posted on Mar, 11 2005 @ 03:04 PM
link   
During the 1st Gulf war the BBC ran a tape of an RAF engagement and a US engagement.
The Brit pilot was very matter of fact , regarding missile lock, weapon away, and missile hit . However when it came to the US pilot all you heard was wooping and shouting
Maybe this is a high factor when it come to all the U.S. friendly fire incidents



posted on Mar, 12 2005 @ 12:09 PM
link   
With all the talk of bravado, I thought I must add my piece... In my experience, there are a few fighter guys out there that act that way, but honestly its more for show, and I have seen most of the ones who are that way put in their place (which is quite funny if you ever have the chance to see it). In my opinion, I want guys up there who are confident, even bordering on egotistical, because those guys are the ones who will make the right decisions, damn the consequences, and not just take orders blindly. That is what I was taught, to think through the orders you are given, and even risk you career, even your life, to do the right thing. And I am always skeptical of anything I see on the news.... BBC is definatly the best of the best, but they are still reporting on their fellow countrymen, so there's going to be some bias in there whether they mean to or not...

Broadsword,
I'm just in T-37s now, and proud to be flying the Tweet on its farewell tour. But I'm hoping to go to T-38s and eventually F-16s (no lawn dart jokes please). If I don't make fighters, AC-130s are my back up choice. But there is no way I could complain about whatever aircraft I get to fly.... I'll be flying!!



posted on Mar, 12 2005 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by chicpilot11
With all the talk of bravado, I thought I must add my piece... In my experience, there are a few fighter guys out there that act that way, but honestly its more for show, and I have seen most of the ones who are that way put in their place (which is quite funny if you ever have the chance to see it). In my opinion, I want guys up there who are confident, even bordering on egotistical, because those guys are the ones who will make the right decisions, damn the consequences, and not just take orders blindly. That is what I was taught, to think through the orders you are given, and even risk you career, even your life, to do the right thing. And I am always skeptical of anything I see on the news.... BBC is definatly the best of the best, but they are still reporting on their fellow countrymen, so there's going to be some bias in there whether they mean to or not...

Broadsword,
I'm just in T-37s now, and proud to be flying the Tweet on its farewell tour. But I'm hoping to go to T-38s and eventually F-16s (no lawn dart jokes please). If I don't make fighters, AC-130s are my back up choice. But there is no way I could complain about whatever aircraft I get to fly.... I'll be flying!!


Yeah, that's the spirit! I too am hoping to become a pilot, through either the Marine Corps or the Army. I think I would prefer to be a helicopter pilot though. I think I will probably do Army ROTC though as I am not totally 100% sure if I want to fly; some people are positive in what they want, but not me (I might try for infantry or armor instead).

Good luck in your flight training. Maybe you could get an F/A-22! It's good to know there are officers like you in the military. There's a site called www.chair-force.com... that is run by some Air Force guy. He has some "views" on the Air Force, but mainly on some of the political problems found in all the military branches. It is frequented by lots of Air Force folk and has cool forums; you'd probably like it.

BTW, this is just pure curiousity on my part, but did you get your commission through the Air Force Academy, ROTC, or OCS??



posted on Mar, 12 2005 @ 07:19 PM
link   
I agree with that the israeli airforce is at least the most experienced. They had lots of combat experience.



posted on Mar, 12 2005 @ 09:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by chicpilot11
With all the talk of bravado, I thought I must add my piece... In my experience, there are a few fighter guys out there that act that way, but honestly its more for show, and I have seen most of the ones who are that way put in their place (which is quite funny if you ever have the chance to see it). In my opinion, I want guys up there who are confident, even bordering on egotistical, because those guys are the ones who will make the right decisions, damn the consequences, and not just take orders blindly. That is what I was taught, to think through the orders you are given, and even risk you career, even your life, to do the right thing. And I am always skeptical of anything I see on the news.... BBC is definatly the best of the best, but they are still reporting on their fellow countrymen, so there's going to be some bias in there whether they mean to or not...



BBC is definitely biased when certain issues involving the UK are concerned..
But they slammed the blair govt. hard for iraq.. more than any other NATO news agency thats for sure...

And btw chicpilot..your superiors, your govt. would definitely want guys up there would would do nothing more than follows their orders through word to word..
Any superior/govt would want that...
The incident involing the 27 IsAF pilots who boycotted flight missions because they claimed that they were needlessly killing paletine civilians under the guise of taking out militants comes to mind..
Now that was true courage under fire..
They all got court martialed of course (I think)..



posted on Mar, 13 2005 @ 04:53 PM
link   
I'm sort of late to this dance, but just wanted to post something.

I was Active Duty AF for 10 years, and now with the Guard for just over 11. I was a grunt on active duty, and a flier now.

Taking dex to stay awake on long haul missions? Yep, but this is controlled by the flight surgeon. When flying in OEF and OIF, I don't remember too many drugged, out of control pilots out there. Remember, this is 2005 and Iraq, not 1973 in Vietnam (not that there were many then). You need all your facilities to fly and can't be wasted and attempting to do something that's hard when you're straight.

I've met professional aircrew from all countries. They all seem to be well trained and cut from the same cloth. I don't think one gets better training than the other, but it might be different.

Egotistical pilots? Yep, when they are on the ground they are some of the most cocky guys I've run into. Of course, it's usually in a bar, trying to pick up some woman (Quick, what's the difference between a pig and a pilot? A pig wouldn't try to date a pilot!)

Controlling of aircraft during close air support (CAS). That's done by CCT or TACP troops. These are Air Force members, mostly enlisted, given tough, special training in that job. Do accidents happen? Yes, they do. But I do remember seeing targetting photos from OIF, and a lot of AAA sites were situated in urban areas. Kinda hard to miss the "Red Cross Childrens Hospital" when that ZSU23-4 is parked right next to it.

Overweight troops? Yes, there are a few. Better get a picture of them, 'cause they are out the freakin' door. AF PT testing is a lot harder than just two years ago, and now it's going to be part of the persons promotion package. Fail your PT, low score on your enlisted evaluation.

Guard fliers not as well trained at Active duty? Nope, I have to pass the same checkride every 17 months, same as an active duty flier. Of course, I don't get the chance to fly as much as an active duty guy, but still have the same requirements. It's hard, but if you want to fly, you go in and get it done. And before anyone says "It's just pencilwhipped", you're wrong. Stan/Eval would sooner cut their own throats before pencilwhipping someones checkride (at least mine would!)

Well, that's enough from me. Time to secure my soapbox.



posted on Mar, 14 2005 @ 01:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ruled By Secrecy

Umm overall I think you might be a bit wrong here. 1914-17 and 1939-42?? Ring any bells.


What are you refering to?

[edit on 11/3/05 by Ruled By Secrecy]


Well I am referring to the fact that the RAF basically wrote the book when it comes to air combat, aling with the Luftwaffe (or Impereal Air Service as it was circa ww1) and Armee d'air. STATISTICALLY the U.S is a relative newcomer. The have made some major contributions though, dont get me wong. A force that can pick itself up and win after things like the Schweinfurt raid of Aug43 has my eternal respect. Those days are gone now though. I terms of recent combat I think you will find that the IAF (israel) has the most recent air combat experience but I could be wrong.



posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 08:46 AM
link   
James,

I agree with you.

Cheers

BHR



posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 09:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by JamesBlonde

Well I am referring to the fact that the RAF basically wrote the book when it comes to air combat, aling with the Luftwaffe (or Impereal Air Service as it was circa ww1) and Armee d'air. STATISTICALLY the U.S is a relative newcomer. The have made some major contributions though, dont get me wong. A force that can pick itself up and win after things like the Schweinfurt raid of Aug43 has my eternal respect. Those days are gone now though. I terms of recent combat I think you will find that the IAF (israel) has the most recent air combat experience but I could be wrong.


lol, the RAF didn't write the book at all not even close. Ther Germans were writing the book in WW!, not the pissy RAF.

Yes we all know about British tactics in WW2 - they flew at night and just blithely bomb a city, not even attempting to hit a military target. The Americans on the other hand did it the right way - they flew in daylight and low so as to at least attempt to hit a valid target.

What does statistically mean exactly ? the US flew over the Western Front in WW1 and dwarfed the RAF in WW2. So you're saying what ? that the RAF is better becasue they were flying their junk 2 years before the US. LOL

[edit on 5-4-2005 by rogue1]



posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 09:06 AM
link   
Rogue,

Are you having a giraffe mate?

Or are you serious?

Cheers

BHR



posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 09:13 AM
link   
LOl I'm serious. Feel free to try and refute anything which I have stated, if you can.



posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 09:31 AM
link   
Rogue,

“Yes we all know about British tactics in WW2 - they flew at night and just blithely bomb a city, not even attempting to hit a military target. The Americans on the other hand did it the right way - they flew in daylight and low so as to at least attempt to hit a valid target”

Where do I start with this, oh that’s right the RAF developed many different methods of dealing with the lack of accuracy inherent with bombing of the time. From radar guiding, to Pathfinder squadrons. What did the USAAF do? Simply keep flying during the day wasting lives of hundreds of young men. Not content with this the US developed tactics and weapons that would not require accuracy.

As to this US involvement in WW1, do not make me laugh. Handful of doughboys at the end when the outcome had been decided.

Cheers

BHR



posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 09:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by BillHicksRules

Where do I start with this, oh that’s right the RAF developed many different methods of dealing with the lack of accuracy inherent with bombing of the time. From radar guiding, to Pathfinder squadrons. What did the USAAF do? Simply keep flying during the day wasting lives of hundreds of young men. Not content with this the US developed tactics and weapons that would not require accuracy.


Umm ok. Radar and pathfinders what a load of BS, they used those to find a city at night, it wasn't accurate at all. The British bombing was just simply terror bombing, nothing more.
The USAAF took a hell of a lot more risk during daytime but they were trying to hit military targets ( to fulfill there mission ) not to terror bomb. They contributed far more to the destruction of German military facilities then the British.




As to this US involvement in WW1, do not make me laugh. Handful of doughboys at the end when the outcome had been decided.


lol ok. Still doesn't change the fact that the Germans were superior with tactics. They further improved them in the lead up to WW2 to the poin where they were far superior to the British. Many of the German tactics are still used today ie. Loose Deuce and Finger Four.



posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 10:12 AM
link   
Rogue,

I have a multi part quiz for you. I will ask a question then let you answer it before we move on. OK?

Question 1.

When did the US start bombing Germany during WW2?

Cheers

BHR



posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by BillHicksRules
Rogue,

I have a multi part quiz for you. I will ask a question then let you answer it before we move on. OK?

Question 1.

When did the US start bombing Germany during WW2?

Cheers

BHR


hmmm ok I'll anwer this one question but no more. August or September 1942.

So what are you giong to say now - that the British ere bombing before the Americans ? Whatever they did before were no more than pin prick raids.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join