Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

Senator Byrd Blasts Bush

Bush Senator Bryd

  • Please log in to reply
41 replies to this topic

#21 CJ AEGIS

CJ AEGIS

    Warship Guru!

  • Islander
  • 6,847 posts

Posted 09 May 2003 - 03:58 AM

Javert Rovinski, on May 9 2003, 01:39 AM, said:

Quote

And yes, I know he didn't actually wear an official US military uniform, but the flight suit he did wear was similar enough that the connection was too obvious to ignore.

That's because both uniforms are designed to be functional...
As I noted earlier even a journalist or other dignitaries who get to backseat in a fighter wear them.
"History has proven too often and too recently that the nation which relaxes its defenses invites attack."
        -Fleet Admiral Nimitz
"Their sailors say they should have flight pay and sub pay both -- they're in the air half the time, under the water the other half""
        - Ernie Pyle: Aboard a DE

#22 jon3831

jon3831

    Iolanthe's evil conservative twin

  • Islander
  • 2,601 posts

Posted 09 May 2003 - 04:41 AM

Just to clarify:

The flight suit is military standard issue.

Just like the parachute, g-suit, life jacket, oxygen mask and helmet the President wore.

The flight suit he wore was a safety issue. It's made of Nomex, a fire retardant material. Again, it's a safety consideration. As CJ noted earlier, *everyone* who flies in an aircraft of that type wears one.

The President wore no badge of rank. The President wore no insignia, save the wings that he earned the right to wear.

And, responding to the remark about the President wearing his Air National Guard uniform...

Well, seeing as how he was an F-102 pilot, one of the uniforms available to him would be a flight suit.
"The issue is not war and peace, rather, how best to   preserve our freedom."
                    --General Russell E. Dougherty, USAF

WWCELeMD?

#23 Guest-AleisterCrowley-Guest

Guest-AleisterCrowley-Guest
  • Guest

Posted 09 May 2003 - 09:59 AM

Hail! The conquering King was arrived on the field of battle...

Byrd is miffed because he didn't get to fly.

#24 CJ AEGIS

CJ AEGIS

    Warship Guru!

  • Islander
  • 6,847 posts

Posted 09 May 2003 - 02:51 PM

AleisterCrowley, on May 9 2003, 07:46 AM, said:

Byrd is miffed because he didn't get to fly.
Agreed Democrats are miffed just because Bush beat them to it and now they look even worse.  Clinton would have done it in a heartbeat except he was probably afraid the ejection seat would “malfunction” while the aircraft was inverted….
"History has proven too often and too recently that the nation which relaxes its defenses invites attack."
        -Fleet Admiral Nimitz
"Their sailors say they should have flight pay and sub pay both -- they're in the air half the time, under the water the other half""
        - Ernie Pyle: Aboard a DE

#25 Rhea

Rhea

  • Islander
  • 16,433 posts

Posted 09 May 2003 - 04:54 PM

Morrhigan, on May 8 2003, 06:32 PM, said:

It seems silly, to me, to compare Bush with George Washington. George Washington wasn't strapping on a sword as a stage prop - it was something he had wielded, by his own hand, in battle. He risked his own life, and took the lives of others; he led men in battle, not at a distance, but in the thick of it. When he wore a military uniform, it was because he'd earned the right to do so.

Has George Bush been through the Air Force Academy? Has he flown over enemy territory and fought for his country at risk to his own life? I find it tacky that he would dress up as someone who has done those things, when he hasn't. And yes, I know he didn't actually wear an official US military uniform, but the flight suit he did wear was similar enough that the connection was too obvious to ignore.

If he were to follow the precedent set by George Washington, he'd dig out his old National Guard (I believe it was National Guard, but I could be wrong) uniform and wear that. Of course, he won't, because it doesn't look nearly as impressive. Instead, he used costuming and spectacle to create an illusion of heroism that has no substance to back it up.

Morrhigan

Agreed.

I came of age during the Viet Nam war. I had to watch most of my male friends either serve (some willingly, some not) in Viet Nam or hike it out of the country to avoid the draft.

I have no sympathy for a spoiled rich man's son, a chronic underachiever who used his family's money and postion to get into the Air National Guard in order to avoid serving in Viet Nam.

And you can talk till you're blue in the face, but too many of the people I loved fought in Viet Nam (and the man I loved died there).  It if sounds like I have no respect for Dubya's choice, you're damn right I don't.

Edited by Rhea, 10 May 2003 - 01:21 AM.

The future is better than the past. Despite the crepehangers, romanticists, and anti-intellectuals, the world steadily grows better because the human mind, applying itself to environment, makes it better. With hands...with tools...with horse sense and science and engineering.
- Robert A. Heinlein

When I don’t understand, I have an unbearable itch to know why. - RAH


Everything is theoretically impossible, until it is done. One could write a history of science in reverse by assembling the solemn pronouncements of highest authority about what could not be done and could never happen.  - RAH

#26 tennyson

tennyson
  • Islander
  • 6,173 posts

Posted 09 May 2003 - 10:54 PM

http://www.straightd...mns/030411.html has a rather detailed history of Bush's Air National Guard service.
"Only an idiot would fight a war on two fronts. Only the heir to the throne of the Kingdom of Idiots would fight a war on twelve fronts."

— Londo, "Ceremonies of Light and Dark" Babylon-5


#27 Kosh

Kosh

    Criag Ferguson For President!

  • Islander
  • 11,149 posts

Posted 09 May 2003 - 11:18 PM

Cecil is always a good read. For those who noticed the nazis reference in the question, here is that colum.

http://www.straightd...mns/030214.html
Can't Touch This!!

#28 MuseZack

MuseZack

    132nd S.O.C.

  • Demigod
  • 5,432 posts

Posted 10 May 2003 - 02:26 AM

I couldn't figure out where that feeling of deja vu I had seeing the photo-op came from.  Until I saw this (from March 2000):

MOSCOW -        Russian Acting President Vladimir Putin took a flight in a fighter jet to Chechnya on Monday, using the extraordinary trip to boost his image as a tough and decisive leader ahead of a presidential election.
        Putin already has a strong lead in opinion polls ahead of the March 26 vote and has used such image-building stunts before. The visit to the war-torn region was itself unexpected and had not been previously announced.
       Video footage of the 47-year-old acting president sitting at the controls of the jet in the co-pilot's seat and climbing energetically from the cockpit were shown on all Russia's main television stations, dominating the afternoon news programme.
       "It's a good machine, beautiful, high-powered and very obedient," Putin told NTV commercial as he stood on the runway after leaving the jet, one of a type which has been used against rebels during Russia's six-month-old offensive in Chechnya.
       He wore a bomber jacket and pilot's mask and Itar-Tass news agency said Putin even flew the jet himself during the trip.


Is it me, or is this eerily familiar?  Is Karl Rove taking a page out of the "Pootie-Poot" (Bush's nickname for Vladimir Putin) playbook?

Zack
"Some day, after we have mastered the wind, the waves, the tides, and gravity,
We shall harness for God the energies of Love.
Then, for the second time in the history of the world,
we will have discovered fire."
--Father Pierre Teilhard de Chardin

#29 Rov Judicata

Rov Judicata

    Crassly Irresponsible and Indifferent

  • Islander
  • 15,720 posts

Posted 10 May 2003 - 02:32 AM

^

:blink:

That's just spooky.... thanks Zack. I vaguely remember that now.
St. Louis must be destroyed!

Me: "I have a job and five credit cards and am looking into signing a two year lease.  THAT MAKES ME OLD."
Josh: "I don't have a job, I have ONE credit card, I'm stuck in a lease and I'm 28! My mom's basement IS ONE BAD DECISION AWAY!"
~~ Josh, winning the argument.

"Congress . . . shall include every idiot, lunatic, insane person, and person non compos mentis[.]" ~1 U.S.C. § 1, selectively quoted for accuracy.

#30 Rhea

Rhea

  • Islander
  • 16,433 posts

Posted 10 May 2003 - 03:15 AM

MuseZack, on May 9 2003, 05:13 PM, said:

I couldn't figure out where that feeling of deja vu I had seeing the photo-op came from.  Until I saw this (from March 2000):

MOSCOW -        Russian Acting President Vladimir Putin took a flight in a fighter jet to Chechnya on Monday, using the extraordinary trip to boost his image as a tough and decisive leader ahead of a presidential election.
        Putin already has a strong lead in opinion polls ahead of the March 26 vote and has used such image-building stunts before. The visit to the war-torn region was itself unexpected and had not been previously announced.
       Video footage of the 47-year-old acting president sitting at the controls of the jet in the co-pilot's seat and climbing energetically from the cockpit were shown on all Russia's main television stations, dominating the afternoon news programme.
       "It's a good machine, beautiful, high-powered and very obedient," Putin told NTV commercial as he stood on the runway after leaving the jet, one of a type which has been used against rebels during Russia's six-month-old offensive in Chechnya.
       He wore a bomber jacket and pilot's mask and Itar-Tass news agency said Putin even flew the jet himself during the trip.


Is it me, or is this eerily familiar?  Is Karl Rove taking a page out of the "Pootie-Poot" (Bush's nickname for Vladimir Putin) playbook?

Zack
LOLOLOL!

That's just too damn eerie!   :suspect:
The future is better than the past. Despite the crepehangers, romanticists, and anti-intellectuals, the world steadily grows better because the human mind, applying itself to environment, makes it better. With hands...with tools...with horse sense and science and engineering.
- Robert A. Heinlein

When I don’t understand, I have an unbearable itch to know why. - RAH


Everything is theoretically impossible, until it is done. One could write a history of science in reverse by assembling the solemn pronouncements of highest authority about what could not be done and could never happen.  - RAH

#31 CJ AEGIS

CJ AEGIS

    Warship Guru!

  • Islander
  • 6,847 posts

Posted 10 May 2003 - 03:40 AM

MuseZack, on May 10 2003, 12:13 AM, said:

"It's a good machine, beautiful, high-powered and very obedient," Putin told NTV commercial as he stood on the runway after leaving the jet, one of a type which has been used against rebels during Russia's six-month-old offensive in Chechnya.
SU-27 IIRC....   Not exactly a S-3. ;)
"History has proven too often and too recently that the nation which relaxes its defenses invites attack."
        -Fleet Admiral Nimitz
"Their sailors say they should have flight pay and sub pay both -- they're in the air half the time, under the water the other half""
        - Ernie Pyle: Aboard a DE

#32 Kosh

Kosh

    Criag Ferguson For President!

  • Islander
  • 11,149 posts

Posted 10 May 2003 - 04:58 AM

Quote

"Pootie-Poot"

I'm surprised it's not "Pootie-Tang"
Can't Touch This!!

#33 Uncle Sid

Uncle Sid

    Highly impressionable

  • Islander
  • 1,414 posts

Posted 10 May 2003 - 06:37 AM

Well, Bush originally wanted to come in on an F/A-18 by all accounts, but the Secret Service wouldn't let him because it couldn't put an agent in a two man cockpit.  

Even then, I think the Su-27 is actually a somewhat better plane in many respects than the F-15 and, by extension, the heavier, carrier operation constrained F/A-18's.  Putin probably had a pretty cool ride.  

Say what they might about the showboating or "thanking" of troops, President Bush has certainly satisfied my Independence Day requirements for this administration.  Yeee-haw!
I can picture in my mind a world without war, a world without hate. And I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it. - Jack Handey

#34 Kosh

Kosh

    Criag Ferguson For President!

  • Islander
  • 11,149 posts

Posted 10 May 2003 - 06:59 AM

http://aeroweb.lucia...p95/fighter.htm

Quote

The Su27's first flight was in 1977, 5 years after the first flight of the F15. Previously the west had claimed that the Soviet Union was at least a generation behind in fighter technology. The Su27 closes this gap and is the first eastern fighter which many western experts have claimed to be the best in the world. The first production versions first flew in 1981 and were basic in their avionics fit, since then they have been upgraded and improved to having a number of Multi Function Displays (MFDs) and quadruplex fly-by-wire flight controls.

Can't Touch This!!

#35 tennyson

tennyson
  • Islander
  • 6,173 posts

Posted 10 May 2003 - 07:13 AM

It really depends upon which version we're talking about for each plane. While the Su-27 is a better dogfighter its avionics and missile systems except for the AA-11 infared guided air to air missile, the helmet mounted sight and the infared search and track system have been 5 years or more behind the equivalent American systems pretty consistently. Thier engines are also generally much less reliable and tend to burn out in as short as 500 hours vs thousands of hours for F/A-18s and F-15s. The later versions like the Su-35, Su-33 and other associated variants have gotten better but the gap still exists and will only get worse with the F-22 entering service. They have very little if any stealth features, no super cruise ability and thier radar is nowhere near as adavanced as the equivalent American system and the AIM-9X and the helmet mounted sight that is in service now with F-16s and the like has already more than matched those earlier adavantages. The standard Su-27 has radar and other avionics about equal to an F-15A or an F/A-18A.
"Only an idiot would fight a war on two fronts. Only the heir to the throne of the Kingdom of Idiots would fight a war on twelve fronts."

— Londo, "Ceremonies of Light and Dark" Babylon-5


#36 CJ AEGIS

CJ AEGIS

    Warship Guru!

  • Islander
  • 6,847 posts

Posted 10 May 2003 - 07:26 AM

Quote

Uncle Sid: Well, Bush originally wanted to come in on an F/A-18 by all accounts, but the Secret Service wouldn't let him because it couldn't put an agent in a two man cockpit.

Well it is the job of the USSS to be paranoid.  The idea of a cleared USN commander or higher rank doing anything to the POTUS in a two man fighter though is a little out there.  Though I do find it ironic Putin was allowed by his bodyguards to pull off that stunt.  


Quote

Uncle Sid:Even then, I think the Su-27 is actually a somewhat better plane in many respects than the F-15 and, by extension, the heavier, carrier operation constrained F/A-18's.

The SU-27 is an excellent dogfighter and aerobatic performer with a capability in those areas beyond that of the F-15.  It would have the potential to eat an F-15 or F/A-18 alive in a guns only dogfight.  In most scenarios the F-15 or F/A-18 would gun down the SU-27.  They have the advantage of having the long guns compared to the knife fighting advantage of the SU-27.  The key to knife fighting is you have to survive to close and against either fighter that would be hard for an SU-27 to do.  

I think this is where the Russians are making a fatal flaw with the S-37.  They are focusing too much on maneuverability over stealth and long-range engagement.  A fighter like the F/A-22 would hold huge advantages against it in any ranged duel and still be able to most likely hold out in a dogfight.
"History has proven too often and too recently that the nation which relaxes its defenses invites attack."
        -Fleet Admiral Nimitz
"Their sailors say they should have flight pay and sub pay both -- they're in the air half the time, under the water the other half""
        - Ernie Pyle: Aboard a DE

#37 CJ AEGIS

CJ AEGIS

    Warship Guru!

  • Islander
  • 6,847 posts

Posted 10 May 2003 - 07:29 AM

tennyson, on May 10 2003, 05:00 AM, said:

The later versions like the Su-35, Su-33 and other associated variants have gotten better but the gap still exists and will only get worse with the F-22 entering service.
As a note the F-22 was redesignated as the F/A-22 and I still slip up on calling it that all the time.  I still at times want to call it the F-22 Lightning. ;).
"History has proven too often and too recently that the nation which relaxes its defenses invites attack."
        -Fleet Admiral Nimitz
"Their sailors say they should have flight pay and sub pay both -- they're in the air half the time, under the water the other half""
        - Ernie Pyle: Aboard a DE

#38 Kosh

Kosh

    Criag Ferguson For President!

  • Islander
  • 11,149 posts

Posted 10 May 2003 - 03:17 PM

Boeing's F/A 22 site.

http://www.boeing.co...22/sitemap.html
Can't Touch This!!

#39 MuseZack

MuseZack

    132nd S.O.C.

  • Demigod
  • 5,432 posts

Posted 10 May 2003 - 05:03 PM

The Russian emphasis on dogfighting maneuverability is even more baffling when one considers that the Russian military is too cash-strapped to give most pilots enough flight time to effectively hone their dogfighting skills.  I don't think one can overstate how important experience and training are to the effectiveness of U.S. pilots.  That said, the SU-27 is a damn sweet plane, and those daredevil maneuvers look great at the international airshows.   :cool:
"Some day, after we have mastered the wind, the waves, the tides, and gravity,
We shall harness for God the energies of Love.
Then, for the second time in the history of the world,
we will have discovered fire."
--Father Pierre Teilhard de Chardin

#40 Lina

Lina

    This too shall pass

  • Islander
  • 2,603 posts

Posted 10 May 2003 - 05:16 PM

MuseZack, on May 10 2003, 04:13 AM, said:

I couldn't figure out where that feeling of deja vu I had seeing the photo-op came from.  Until I saw this (from March 2000):

[snip]

Is it me, or is this eerily familiar?  Is Karl Rove taking a page out of the "Pootie-Poot" (Bush's nickname for Vladimir Putin) playbook?

Zack
Sheesh, I remember that! Does this mean that George Bush will use a submarine as a form of the transportation next time? (I couldn't find an article about it, but I remember Putin sailing at the submarine at some point).

Lina

Edited by Lina, 10 May 2003 - 05:18 PM.




Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Bush, Senator Bryd

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users