Steve Davies
-
Posts
898 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
17
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Downloads
Wiki
Posts posted by Steve Davies
-
-
M2
I think you're being harsh - I think he's raising what he believes is a valid point that should be taken at face value - you don't have to agree with it, though. I am the first to interject when the Brits start Yank bashing over on PPRuNe, but I don't think that's what RAF Eng is doing.
It's pretty clear from the range of well-reasoned, civil responses here that there won't be a prefect compromise on this. FWIW, though, I think that PA did the right thing by shooting the images, even if posting the most explicit shot was ill-advised.
-
RockerOriginally posted by Rocker:I understand your points, Steve. But...
Now if it was the family's wishes to be published on the internet, fine (but I doubt it). But I think this is disrespectful, albeit inadvertantly.
Your counter comments are all valid and I would be interested in knowing what PA's take on this is. I know I wouldn't want these pictures taken, and I know I wouldn't want them posted, but I don't know what Maj Gilbert's family wanted, so...
I suppose I was less shocked by these because I had also seen very similar shots of Maj. Watkins and Capt. Das's wives (both AF officers) stricken with grief at their husbands' joint internment at Arlington (Watkins and Das were killed in April '03 when their Strike Eagle went down during OIF). These pictures were also on .af.mil.
Speaking of M2's agents of change, I wonder whether a letter to them asking for an overview of their policy on the matter would shed any light?
Cheers
-
Gentlemen
As a non-service member, and member of the media, here is my initial reaction to the webpage linked by CH:
You cannot photograph individuals and then publish the photographs without written consent. A release form must be signed if the photographs are released into the public domains – in this case, such consent may be an implicit condition of any burial at Arlington. I don’t know.
It is possible that the family wanted to have their grief captured on film. There are several possible reasons, but I am not going to try and second-guess people I don't know. They would have known that the Air Force intended to use them for official purposes; if they did not, then the Air Force has left itself open to litigation.
I'm not preconditioned to defend SAF/PA, but my experience of USAF PAOs over the last 6-years has, without exception, been that they are good people with a sense of respect for, and duty to protect, the guys at the tip of the spear – they are not low-life paparazzi types who will stop at nothing to get a sensational photograph. I have had brief dealings with the photographer in this case, and he struck me as most definitely one of the former.
Knowing the Air Force’s unbridled fear of litigation, I would like to think that the Gilbert family did approve the photography, and that they did have a good idea as to exactly how intimate and controversial those photographs would be. Assuming that they did, I’d be more inclined to take my hat off to them for showing such enormous courage and strength for allowing a photographer to be present at the funeral of their son/husband/father/brother, than I would be to take cheap shots at SAF/PA for doing something that in the years to come will preserve the memory of Maj. Gilbert and place firmly into the history of the war in Iraq the sacrifice that he and his family made.
Edited to say: I do understand, though, why there is such a strong negative reaction to this particular image. If I went into harm's way, i know that I wouldn't want my Mum to be left without a son, and I know I wouldn't want her to be photographed grieving. But the bottom line is that the presence of a photographer would be her choice, not mine.
[ 14. December 2006, 03:39: Message edited by: Steve Davies ]
-
Thanks for all the responses, fellas. Really helpful.
GBoc, wilco and wilco.
BFMthis, WTF? I have no idea even where to begin decoding that one.
-
Anyone care to give me a run-down of the words AF fighter pilots/WSOs do and do not say based on sexual inuendo and the like?
I am trying to compile a list for a book due out next year.
Any help much appreciated, and I'll get the ball rolling:
Head = cranium
Box = container
Period = period, dot.
Any numercial value = 69, 6.9 etc
-
Chuck
It was 'the other' place that the Red Eagles operated out of that can't be mentioned. The Stink Bug ended up forcing them out of TTR.
As for the Red Hats, Jack Manclark (referenced in the article above) told me that they will never be declassified. The inference being that they continue to operate, and will always do so provided that there are still foreign bits of kit that need testing.
Good to see Mark Postai finally getting the recognition he deserves.
-
MD
The AF and Navy will not be declassifying the fatal mishaps from the Red Eagles... however, I know that the AF lost only one pilot in the programme and I know who he was: it wasn't Gen Bond.
My suspicion is that Bond was actually flying with the Red Hats when he was killed. The Red Hats is still classified. So, I doubt that there will ever be an official explanation for the mishap beyond what has already been made public.
-
Ace
I have a photograph of the Bolling MiG, under ceiling-suspended parachutes to protect from prying eyes, dated 1981. Interesting to know it's now at Udvar. Thanks.
-
There were 2 MiG-17s and a MiG-21F-13 loaned from Israel and returned in 1969. Once they had been sent back the US was left with nothing to fly.
Although the desire to stand-up a squadron like the Red Eagles had always existed, it wasn't until the Egyptian trade (MiGs for F-4s) that the 'assets' were available to do it with.
-
It was a Yak-23 FLORA in 1953 that was 'loaned' by Yugoslavia whilst it was being shipped overland from the mother country to a baltic state. I have the declassified files here at home.
For the most part, Constant Peg's jets came from Egypt following Cairo's breakdown in relations with Moscow.
-
One of the more interesting AF press releases, and this one's long overdue!
WASHINGTON - After decades of secrecy, the Air Force today acknowledged that it flew Communist-built fighters at the Tonopah Test Range northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada.From 1977 through 1988, the program, known as CONSTANT PEG, saw U.S. Air Force, Navy, and Marine aircrews flying against Soviet-designed MiG fighters as part of a training program where American pilots could better learn how to defeat or evade the Communist bloc's fighters of the day.
Brigadier General Hawk Carlisle, 3rd Wing commander at Elmendorf AFB, Alaska, is a former member of the 4477th Test and Evaluation Squadron who remembers the valuable training the unit provided.
"CONSTANT PEG afforded pilots an opportunity to learn how to fight enemy aircraft in a controlled, safe environment, without having to endure the risks of actual air combat," said Brig. Gen. Carlisle. "Typically a pilot would start with a basic familiarization flight to observe the enemy airplane and study its characteristics, practicing "one-on-one" defensive and offensive maneuvers against it, and finally, experience multi-bogey engagements high over the desert scrubland of the Nellis Air Force Base ranges.
As a result of marginal performance of American fighter forces in the skies over North Vietnam, CONSTANT PEG complemented other revolutionary training programs such as Red Flag, Top Gun and the Air Force and Navy-Marine aggressor squadrons. The program was also intended to eliminate the "buck fever" or nervous excitement many pilots experience on their first few combat missions. Historical experience indicated that pilots who survived their first ten missions were much more likely to survive a complete combat tour, and CONTSTANT PEG was intended to teach them the right "moves" to enable them to come out on top of any engagement.
The end of the CONSTANT PEG nearly coincided with the end of the Cold War, by which time some of its "graduates" had already proven themselves in actual air combat.
Threat aircraft flown by the Red Eagles spanned several decades and technical generations of capability. There was the MiG-17 Fresco, a small, agile single-seat transonic fighter placed in service just after the Korean War and used extensively over Vietnam and the Middle East; the MiG-21 Fishbed, a high supersonic fighter used world-wide in large numbers, and the swing-wing MiG-23 Flogger, likewise in global service, an attempt by the Soviets to match the sophisticated capabilities of the F-4 Phantom.
"Although it came too late to influence Vietnam, CONSTANT PEG training greatly influenced the success of American Airmen in DESERT STORM, who shot down 40 Iraqi fighters, many of which were Fishbeds and Floggers," said Brig Gen. Carlisle.
-
Priceless!Originally posted by BeerMan:Really, I like the pictures of the guys that won the cosmo awards. I think you are are just jealous of their hunky good looks and ass-slapability.
OK, that may or may not be true, I am just so very sad that I left this profile open on a public PC...but so very happy that the person that found it only made this one post then was nice enough to log me out.
-
It's not looking good, I'm afraid. A quick Google for the 'Mr. Cosmopolitan' competition revealed the following disturbing image:
One can only hope that he wins the contest outright and is not relegated to the second place title, 'Mr Fashion Look'.
-
A Nav
Thanks for the invite. I'm on my way over.
Xtndr
Is your missus a big fan of Widow Twankey?
[ 24. October 2006, 10:02: Message edited by: Steve Davies ]
-
Bendy
You'd have thought I'd have known to keep away from anything controversial on these boards. Some people just never learn.
For those that think this thread is driven by fat, ugly men struggling to suppress homosexual tendencies, that certainly ain't me. I'm as straight and manly as the next bloke:
-
Couldn't find a way to integrate this into my text on UPT. Any suggestions?
I particularly like that he wats to find a woman who he can go on a bike ride with. Perhaps what he actually said was that he wants a woman who likes to be ridden like a bike? Damned journalists.
-
-
MoD confirmed type as Nimrod MR2.
RIP.
-
I get all my super-secret-squirrel unclassified-classified info on the T-6 Texan II from BaseOps.Net. Plus, I know it's all kosher since the site is so obviously an official Air Force tool. Thanks, BaseOps.net!
-
CH
From talking to a couple of guys on the raid who saw Karma 52 go down, and based on the autopsy reports of the one guy eventually repatriated, the general view is that it is more likely that they ejected following a SA-3 impact on the right side of the jet.
-
Rainman
I don't do "taunting". I ask questions and then shut-up and listen to the answers. I took your response at face value since you always tell it straight and I had no reason to think that this time would be any different. So, yes, I was surprised. Why? Because I expected someone as experienced as you to have spent time flying in former Eastern Bloc countries and to have met, drank beer with and shared "10 per cent true" stories with them about your jet, their jet, moving mud and their experiences (or those of others) in the 10-year war between the Soviets and the Mujahaddine (Sp?). In that sense it was "my bad" for making that assumption.
Edited for spelling.
[ 06. June 2006, 13:24: Message edited by: Steve Davies ]
-
That's surprising. I suppose I expected you to be genned-up on it. My bad.Originally posted by Rainman A-10:I know nothing more about the SU-25 than any ROTC cadet on the boards.
-
Asides from which... what's your view on the Frogffot compared to the A-10? I am thinking about all facets of the mud moving business, including airframe survivability and the like. Like the A-10, I have always heard that the Su-25 can soak up a tremendous amount of punishment and still get home. Stories and pictures from Afghanistan during the 10-year war seem to confirm that. Just thinking aloud...Originally posted by Rainman A-10:That is the SH-1T Target.
-
Looks like a Su-25UBK FROGFOOT.
AF PA funeral photo
in General Discussion
Posted
I can't comment on whether this is the right forum for him, but I would agree that the 'other' forum can be pretty anti-American. As for RAF Eng's grammar and txt-talk, it doesn't surprise me that there are indeed Brits who can give Bender a run for his money. Sorry, Bendy, couldn't resist.
I would be surprised if the image was removed because the appropriate permissions were not in place from the family - more likely it was removed because, upon reflection, SAF/PA considered that it was simply so powerful/intrusive/whatever adjective you choose to apply. Equally, as you suggest, it could have been because complaints were received.
I'll email them and post whatever response they send back. Seems to me that this is actually a pretty worthwhile discussion.