Some of you Anonymous posters are really brainwashed into the DoD/ADF 'group-think' culture and obviously have a pretty shallow knowledge re the wealth of expertise in the retired military community.
Last Friday, I attended a bi-monthly 76/77SQNs mixed luncheon which usually involves people from bottom to top of the rank structure, including some serving personnel (COs, pilots, groundies). Some of maybe 10 retired Air rankers often attend and alongside me were a retired CAS (Korean War veteran who also flew Sabres and F-111), and a recently retired 2 Star Engineer/Pilot who also flew Sabres in my era and was recently recalled to involve in a 3 person group analysing the diabolical mess that the Navy has got itself into regarding warship maintenance. Pete Criss would probably also involve if he lived closer to Newcastle.
There are some pretty common denominators among the retired group that regularly participate. They have mostly been involved in serious conflicts (Korea, Vietnam) and those recently retired at higher rank levels have awareness of issues involved re subsequent conflicts (Iraq, Afghanistan) and somewhat benign interventions in East Timor and the Solomon Islands. They network regarding what is happening in Canberra and are generally keen researchers concerning technological advances. Most are avid readers of military history and considerable book swapping goes on among the group. The same can be said for several who make strong contributions to the very worthy analytical efforts of Air Power Australia.
The ability of those with meaningful combat experience to think contemporarily outside the square regarding operational survivability should not be underestimated. Then Group Captain 'Bay' Adams flew with me a bit in Vietnam and we used to debate fighter versus helo issues long after bar closing. He features in Pierre Klosterman's book 'The Big Show'; both of them were the only 2 survivors of a flight of 8 Typhoons that attacked a German airfield during WW2 – he also served in Korea. Post-Vietnam, big 'Bay' rose to Star rank and was instrumental in promoting the development of helo versus fighter tactics in which another former fighter pilot and myself became involved as COs of 5 and 9SQNs respectively (that former CO5 was also at the recent luncheon). Unfortunately, all of that good work was lost after the stupid battlefield helo transfer decision in 1989, along with a wealth of helicopter combat experience that had been accumulated across the Air Force.
2 of the immediate past/present Air Force hierarchy mentioned (AH and GB) have never fired a shot in anger. Apparently, they were supportive of the appalling decisions to shed F-111, Iroquois, Caribou (and eventually Blackhawk, Seahawk) creating widening capability gaps at huge cost with diminished ADF military capacity. Preparedness to 'fall on swords' to defend the necessity of maintaining continuous adequate and credible military capabilities does not seem an attribute of Service Chiefs these days. The whole politico-military push is primarily about supporting the rent-seekers involved with defence industry.
Sunday, June 10, 2012
Retired knowledge--Knowledge retired
This was a comment from Bushranger on another post. It deserves to be its own post.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Much of Pierre's book is fiction including that Tempest raid. It didn't go down quite like that... but whatever.
And you would know because?
By Ely,
So we dont throw BR71 points out with the proverbial bathwater on this side issue Bay Adam's bio here http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/adams-john-irwin-bay-12118 and here http://mick_quinn.tripod.com/id50.html (hope this clunky "cut and paste" of the links works)
And here is a fascinating coverage of that part of aviation history including 3SQDN's story around Apr/May'45 http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/archive/index.php?t-9151.html including a bit on the Schwerin operation. A humps a hump and it dont much matter imho.
Cheers
Ely
Good post, but I don't feel too many 'anonymous' posters in Elp's blog actually support DoD/ADF's 'groupthink' view in supporting the F-35 and retiring the F-111.
I'm not quite sure where Bushranger got the thinking that so many of the 'Anons' out there are in such a 'group'?
Likely right though isn't it just typical that those that do support the DoD/ADF groupthink fuelled views hide behind the veil of anonymity, except those who have been outed like Magoo, gf0012-aust, aussie digger, solomon and Abraham Gubler?
Ok so whats the "whatever" then Anonymous 1 @11am,..... no, nothing? Just what the current defence muddle is riddled with and this blog needs, another ABBA (Anonymous, Brainwashed, Bullshit, Artist).
I take it the "whatever" refers to the main substance of his argument here, that current and recent serving flag ranks have got it all wrong and are steering us towards the rocks. Or maybe I am just wrong and you could explain to me why "some anonymous guy" should think his all to brief viewpoint more credible than Bushranger who actually served in a high ranking capacity, knows the tactics, personalities involved and of course that slightly annoying point to your retort, he actually knew Group Captain 'Bay' Adams of Klosterman's book. So are you inferring that either the Group Captain or Bushranger are mistaken or liars?
Dont even bother to reply if you cant put a name up, better still dont bother to post at all if thats your game. I am so sick to death of these anonymous posts from all the rent seeking Blog plants who try to build support for the unsupportable and constantly attempt to divert from reality or engage in character smear campaigns against the growing list of credible and dissenting voices.
Some remarks on the earlier associated thread, re Sabre and Huey pilots, triggered my input and I should have added this perspective.
Many of the recently retired Senior Officer fraternity flew either or both. When the RAAF established a helo capability in 1962/63, experienced pilots were drawn from a spread of other roles, including fighter operations. Subsequently, around 200 Air Force pilots flew Iroquois over the 5.5 years (2,000 days) of Vietnam War involvement. The bulk of this group were junior pilots virtually straight out of flying training and many of them went on to fly Mirage, F-111, Hornets, and command such units. Some only retired pretty recently at higher rank levels.
The Sabre and Huey were of course pretty simple platforms, but those who flew them had no difficulty adapting to higher technologies.I spent 10 years in airline flight training when glass cockpit and computerised flight management systems were coming into vogue. While some older pilots took a little longer to adapt to newer concepts, they largely all coped well.
So; anybody who thinks they are a 'hotshot' because they drive a Hornet needs a reality check. It is just another platform with systems that anybody can be trained to operate. And, because some of us retirees mix fairly often with the current fighter pilot fraternity, we have fair awareness of operational considerations.
Change of tack. Re the accuracy of Pierre Klosterman's accounts. Throughout all combat, action events were seldom recorded first-hand soon after happening. In Vietnam for example, the data from 9SQN Pilot Mission Debrief forms (if completed) was gathered by another unit outside the Squadron and the official unit history collated mostly belatedly by a junior pilot as a secondary duty. The end result was numerous minor discrepancies in timings and omission of some events entirely.
Now; just to lighten things up a bit, this little anecdote.
Group Captain 'Bay' Adams was flying with me during trooping and we were leading the second of 2 flights of 4 Hueys to extract an infantry company from a pretty tight PZ in the middle of jungle. Big 'Bay' was flying and we were landing roughly in finger 4 formation pretty tight up the first flight. I said to him 'Just hold it lightly on the skids after touchdown as the ground beneath old dry rice paddy might not be firm.'
Hitherto, he had not flown Hueys much and did not yet have a sensitive feel. He pushed the collective down a bit too far and we began to teeter backwards with some juddering from mast bumping. I took over and moved forward a bit before handing it back advising again to just hold it lightly on the skids. But he was a big man and leaned a bit too heavily on the collective and the ground collapsed beneath us causing us to roll backwards with severe mast bumping. I took over and we managed to move enough to find firmer ground and shutdown so I could inspect the mast.
While climbing on the cabin, I noticed a white hot smoke canister thrown by the troops had been rolled by rotor wash into dry grass which burst into flame. The infanteers were very jumpy having had a few contacts with the enemy and I recall looking down into a virtual sea of wide-open eyes. The mast did not seem damaged beyond usual slight marking and I think I decided we could fly it out.
When I climbed back into my seat, big 'Bay' said something like: 'That was a very brave thing to do' to which I replied: 'Not really, the bloody pad is on fire'. He seemingly had not noticed that while wondering what he may have done wrong.
We bumped again on occasions years later, usually in a bar, when he had risen to higher ranks and he would always say: 'Remember that day we were flying together in Vietnam....?' and my response was usually: 'I remember'. A very fine man and a great leader.
Off the subject of the thread, I know, but I knew a bloke (long deceased) who flew on Pierre Closterman's Tempest squadron before and after the Normandy. He became quite passionate whenever the man's name came up, in a most negative way. To say he didn't like the good Pierre would be the understatement of all time.
Most reader's here who are Australian, ex-service and of a certain age will recall from their youth the oft repeated phrase that the senior ranks of both the Services and the Government seemed to be thickly populated by "poofters, dunces and gecko watchers". ('Gecko watching' involved officers who lived in tropical climes and who sat for hours in bars every night drinking themselves into oblivion doing nothing but watching the gecko lizards running across the walls and ceilings catching the many insects attracted by the bar lights.)
When I read Closterman's book, he gave more than a few hints that he might be indeed be a P,D,& a GW, but he proved this to be so with his own words when telling of his time in Indo China and the many nights he spent "fascinated by the small lizards catching insects".
what other thread?
Post a Comment