|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
OT: Tommy on Sat photos. Facebook hiding my entries
On Tuesday, February 2, 2021 at 3:18:33 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 2 Feb 2021 09:42:48 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich wrote: On Monday, February 1, 2021 at 5:00:53 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote: On Mon, 1 Feb 2021 08:12:25 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich wrote: On Monday, February 1, 2021 at 6:27:02 AM UTC-8, wrote: On Sunday, January 31, 2021 at 12:17:45 PM UTC-5, wrote: On Sunday, January 31, 2021 at 5:57:30 AM UTC-8, wrote: On Sunday, January 17, 2021 at 6:27:20 PM UTC-5, News 2021 wrote: For a man of high IQ, your understanding of 'satellite images' is sadly lacking. Perhaps you seen too many movies. Perhaps you were expecting to see the doors they welded shut to apartment blocks. Bear in mind, Tommy was able to discern the condition of a dirt road under a jungle canopy while peering through the open bomb bay door of a B-52 flying at 5000 feet. So you like passing off lies like that? Google never forgets, sparky. In https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicy...m/z8XzrNV_FwAJ, you wrote: "I have flown over it in bombers at 5,000 ft. So shove your "pictures" since I looked at it through open bomb bay doors. " Then you tried to follow that up with a picture from a 2019 vietnamese real estate ad claiming it proved the roads were wide open and paved - during the war. Read it here https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicy...m/1vRW0H-WAgAJ That's the same thread where you made the claim that the north vietnamese surrendered. WE can re-read that claim he https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicy...m/4Zxd0YU-FwAJ I did say that I crawled along the narrow shelf between the tailgunner's position and the forward airlock with the bomb bay doors open. But you feel the need to make that into a lie because you have never done anything like that and don't have the slightest imagination. I think it's pretty safe to assume you've never done anything like that either. Just like you're claim that you worked at livermore labs or nasa - because leaving experience like that off your resume is _such_ a good idea. OF course, since you only consider the truth to be what giuliani and trump tell you are the truth, it's not surprising you would get confused over a truth, facts, and lies. Here's something you and that ass-sucking sycophant jute never seemed to understand: Every stupid claim, insidious lie, and overall demonstration of your incompetence is captured here until the day that google finally decides to shut it down. WE can prove every last little bizarre claim you subsequently deny. For someone who clams to be such a technology genius, you really haven't quite figured out this interweb thingie. Firstly, B52's NEVER bombed the Ho Chi Minh trail since it was almost entirely in Cambodia which we were at peace with. Road improvements in your mind seem to equal a superhighway, It wasn't. Improvements were cutting away the rainforest and driving cars on the northern end over which we flew AFTER a bomb run on the SAM missile sites along the DMZ. Defoliant was dropped on on the southern end of the trail which was all the way down around Saigon and nowhere where the bomb group dropped bombs. This was almost entirely the responsibility of other fighter/bomber groups. Seeing the TRAIL was not looking down through a canopy of forest since it was in plain sight up on the DNZ. When you are a ****ing loud mouthed liar it shows in every word you write. The FACT is that North Vietnam agreed that the war was at a stalemate but after Nixon's resignation, the Democrats did not financially support South Vietnam so they did not have the wherewithall to resist the Russian and Chinese backed North. Tommy, you, quite simply do not know what you are talking about! https://www.history.com/this-day-in-...the-first-time Dated 18 March 1959 U.S. B-52 bombers are diverted from their targets in South Vietnam to attack suspected communist base camps and supply areas in Cambodia for the first time in the war. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Men Operation Menu was a covert United States Strategic Air Command (SAC) tactical bombing campaign conducted in eastern Cambodia from 18 March 1969 until 26 May 1970 as part of both the Vietnam War and the Cambodian Civil War. OK, what does that have to do with your claim or that buffoon that for some reason I could not see the Ho Chi Min Trail as we turned around at the DMZ? Come along little boy, explain how this has anything to do with my original statement and the lies of you and ****head? Tommy you wrote above "Firstly, B52's NEVER bombed the Ho Chi Minh trail since it was almost entirely in Cambodia which we were at peace with." Which was either an outright lie or simply yet more proof that you blather on about things about which you know nothing at all. Which I replied to, and now you are zooming around in airplanes up on the DMZ. Which brings up the subject of you flying about in B-52's while stationed at Guam. I've asked you many times what a no-account A2c was doing flying in B-52's on combat missions and you haven't replied so I'll be a bit more explicate. You never flew on a B-52 combat mission and all your stories about peeping out of bombays at 5,000 ft are simply lies. And pretty poor ones at that. Or didn't you know that the normal bombing altitude of the B-52's over Vietnam was 25 - 50,000 ft? And yes, I was there and I saw B-52's dropping bombs. There were NO Airforce personnel around where the B52's were dropping bombs so why are you lying yet again? There were NO Air bases anywhere near front lines. Also you haven't a clue about the bombing altitude. When you're stupid you should stop showing it so plainly. There was a river valley on the 17th parallel and The SAM sites were in that Valley. Give us some more of your stupid bull**** about what altitude we bombed from when a B52 was supposed to drop nuclear weapons from those altitudes and didn't need pinpoint accuracy. A SAM missile couldn't even reach that high moron. I told you how and why I was on B52's. If you cannot remember I can't help your dementia. Somehow you seem to think that only officers were on them. ALL of the tail gunners were enlisted men. Sorry if I made you cry. |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
OT: Tommy on Sat photos. Facebook hiding my entries
On Tue, 2 Feb 2021 15:47:16 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
wrote: On Tuesday, February 2, 2021 at 3:18:33 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote: On Tue, 2 Feb 2021 09:42:48 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich wrote: On Monday, February 1, 2021 at 5:00:53 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote: On Mon, 1 Feb 2021 08:12:25 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich wrote: On Monday, February 1, 2021 at 6:27:02 AM UTC-8, wrote: On Sunday, January 31, 2021 at 12:17:45 PM UTC-5, wrote: On Sunday, January 31, 2021 at 5:57:30 AM UTC-8, wrote: On Sunday, January 17, 2021 at 6:27:20 PM UTC-5, News 2021 wrote: For a man of high IQ, your understanding of 'satellite images' is sadly lacking. Perhaps you seen too many movies. Perhaps you were expecting to see the doors they welded shut to apartment blocks. Bear in mind, Tommy was able to discern the condition of a dirt road under a jungle canopy while peering through the open bomb bay door of a B-52 flying at 5000 feet. So you like passing off lies like that? Google never forgets, sparky. In https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicy...m/z8XzrNV_FwAJ, you wrote: "I have flown over it in bombers at 5,000 ft. So shove your "pictures" since I looked at it through open bomb bay doors. " Then you tried to follow that up with a picture from a 2019 vietnamese real estate ad claiming it proved the roads were wide open and paved - during the war. Read it here https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicy...m/1vRW0H-WAgAJ That's the same thread where you made the claim that the north vietnamese surrendered. WE can re-read that claim he https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicy...m/4Zxd0YU-FwAJ I did say that I crawled along the narrow shelf between the tailgunner's position and the forward airlock with the bomb bay doors open. But you feel the need to make that into a lie because you have never done anything like that and don't have the slightest imagination. I think it's pretty safe to assume you've never done anything like that either. Just like you're claim that you worked at livermore labs or nasa - because leaving experience like that off your resume is _such_ a good idea. OF course, since you only consider the truth to be what giuliani and trump tell you are the truth, it's not surprising you would get confused over a truth, facts, and lies. Here's something you and that ass-sucking sycophant jute never seemed to understand: Every stupid claim, insidious lie, and overall demonstration of your incompetence is captured here until the day that google finally decides to shut it down. WE can prove every last little bizarre claim you subsequently deny. For someone who clams to be such a technology genius, you really haven't quite figured out this interweb thingie. Firstly, B52's NEVER bombed the Ho Chi Minh trail since it was almost entirely in Cambodia which we were at peace with. Road improvements in your mind seem to equal a superhighway, It wasn't. Improvements were cutting away the rainforest and driving cars on the northern end over which we flew AFTER a bomb run on the SAM missile sites along the DMZ. Defoliant was dropped on on the southern end of the trail which was all the way down around Saigon and nowhere where the bomb group dropped bombs. This was almost entirely the responsibility of other fighter/bomber groups. Seeing the TRAIL was not looking down through a canopy of forest since it was in plain sight up on the DNZ. When you are a ****ing loud mouthed liar it shows in every word you write. The FACT is that North Vietnam agreed that the war was at a stalemate but after Nixon's resignation, the Democrats did not financially support South Vietnam so they did not have the wherewithall to resist the Russian and Chinese backed North. Tommy, you, quite simply do not know what you are talking about! https://www.history.com/this-day-in-...the-first-time Dated 18 March 1959 U.S. B-52 bombers are diverted from their targets in South Vietnam to attack suspected communist base camps and supply areas in Cambodia for the first time in the war. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Men Operation Menu was a covert United States Strategic Air Command (SAC) tactical bombing campaign conducted in eastern Cambodia from 18 March 1969 until 26 May 1970 as part of both the Vietnam War and the Cambodian Civil War. OK, what does that have to do with your claim or that buffoon that for some reason I could not see the Ho Chi Min Trail as we turned around at the DMZ? Come along little boy, explain how this has anything to do with my original statement and the lies of you and ****head? Tommy you wrote above "Firstly, B52's NEVER bombed the Ho Chi Minh trail since it was almost entirely in Cambodia which we were at peace with." Which was either an outright lie or simply yet more proof that you blather on about things about which you know nothing at all. Which I replied to, and now you are zooming around in airplanes up on the DMZ. Which brings up the subject of you flying about in B-52's while stationed at Guam. I've asked you many times what a no-account A2c was doing flying in B-52's on combat missions and you haven't replied so I'll be a bit more explicate. You never flew on a B-52 combat mission and all your stories about peeping out of bombays at 5,000 ft are simply lies. And pretty poor ones at that. Or didn't you know that the normal bombing altitude of the B-52's over Vietnam was 25 - 50,000 ft? And yes, I was there and I saw B-52's dropping bombs. There were NO Airforce personnel around where the B52's were dropping bombs so why are you lying yet again? There were NO Air bases anywhere near front lines. Also you haven't a clue about the bombing altitude. When you're stupid you should stop showing it so plainly. There was a river valley on the 17th parallel and The SAM sites were in that Valley. Give us some more of your stupid bull**** about what altitude we bombed from when a B52 was supposed to drop nuclear weapons from those altitudes and didn't need pinpoint accuracy. A SAM missile couldn't even reach that high moron.Go "We" bombed at? What's this "we"? You got a mouse in your pocket? Tommy the real problem isn't whether we bombed here or we bombed there, it is whether you are a confirmed liar or simply so deluded that you actually think that you were a hero? I told you how and why I was on B52's. If you cannot remember I can't help your dementia. Somehow you seem to think that only officers were on them. ALL of the tail gunners were enlisted men. Sorry if I made you cry. Nope Tommy, you have never replied to any of my questions about how you were flying combat missions on B-52's and in fact you didn't really answer the question this time. But are you now telling me that you were a gunner on a B-52? Really truly? A A2c 3 level electrical guy flying as a gunner? Tommy you are a liar. After all you have told us that you were a 3 level (apprentice) and worked (tool box carrier) for an A1c, in fact you even posted his name although I've forgotten it. And now you tell us that you really were a gunner? But perhaps you were a secret gunner that nobody knew about and you masqueraded as an no account junior airman. What did you do, lurk in phone booths and shout SHAZAM! and bingo you emerged in your flying clothes complete with parachute. Tommy, as I said before "you are pitiful". What is the playground chant? "Liar, liar, pants on fire" So from now on you will be known as "Hot Tush Tommy". As for B-52 crew members, no some B-52's carried one enlisted man but at the base I was at they were all officers. -- Cheers, John B. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
OT: Tommy on Sat photos. Facebook hiding my entries
On Tue, 2 Feb 2021 15:47:16 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
wrote: There were NO Airforce personnel around where the B52's were dropping bombs so why are you lying yet again? There were NO Air bases anywhere near front lines. Also you haven't a clue about the bombing altitude. When you're stupid you should stop showing it so plainly. There was a river valley on the 17th parallel and The SAM sites were in that Valley. Give us some more of your stupid bull**** about what altitude we bombed from when a B52 was supposed to drop nuclear weapons from those altitudes and didn't need pinpoint accuracy. A SAM missile couldn't even reach that high moron. I don't have a number for the Vietnam Ware era B-52F ceiling. The earlier B-52B ceiling was 47,300 ft while the later B-52H ceiling was 50,000 ft. Bombing altitude seems to have been around 30,000 ft. https://www.boeing.com/defense/b-52-bomber/#/technical-specifications Various V-750 / SA-2 SAM missiles and systems in use had maximum altitudes of 23,000 meters (75,400 ft) to 35,000 meters (114,000 ft). I can't tell which V-750 version was in use in Vietnam, but my guess(tm) is the early ones went to at least 25,000 meters (82,000 ft): https://military.wikia.org/wiki/S-75_Dvina It scored the first destruction of an enemy aircraft by a surface-to-air missile, shooting down a Taiwanese Martin RB-57D Canberra over China, on October 7, 1959, hitting it with three V-750 (1D) missiles at an altitude of 20 km (65,600 ft). A missile with a maximum altitude of 82,000 ft should have no trouble hitting an airplane with a ceiling between 47,300 and 50,000 ft. -- Jeff Liebermann PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272 Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
OT: Tommy on Sat photos. Facebook hiding my entries
On 2/2/2021 8:06 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 2 Feb 2021 15:47:16 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich wrote: There were NO Airforce personnel around where the B52's were dropping bombs so why are you lying yet again? There were NO Air bases anywhere near front lines. Also you haven't a clue about the bombing altitude. When you're stupid you should stop showing it so plainly. There was a river valley on the 17th parallel and The SAM sites were in that Valley. Give us some more of your stupid bull**** about what altitude we bombed from when a B52 was supposed to drop nuclear weapons from those altitudes and didn't need pinpoint accuracy. A SAM missile couldn't even reach that high moron. I don't have a number for the Vietnam Ware era B-52F ceiling. The earlier B-52B ceiling was 47,300 ft while the later B-52H ceiling was 50,000 ft. Bombing altitude seems to have been around 30,000 ft. https://www.boeing.com/defense/b-52-bomber/#/technical-specifications Various V-750 / SA-2 SAM missiles and systems in use had maximum altitudes of 23,000 meters (75,400 ft) to 35,000 meters (114,000 ft). I can't tell which V-750 version was in use in Vietnam, but my guess(tm) is the early ones went to at least 25,000 meters (82,000 ft): https://military.wikia.org/wiki/S-75_Dvina It scored the first destruction of an enemy aircraft by a surface-to-air missile, shooting down a Taiwanese Martin RB-57D Canberra over China, on October 7, 1959, hitting it with three V-750 (1D) missiles at an altitude of 20 km (65,600 ft). A missile with a maximum altitude of 82,000 ft should have no trouble hitting an airplane with a ceiling between 47,300 and 50,000 ft. https://medium.com/war-is-boring/lis...i-48d09274bcdc -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
OT: Tommy on Sat photos. Facebook hiding my entries
On Tue, 02 Feb 2021 18:06:26 -0800, Jeff Liebermann
wrote: On Tue, 2 Feb 2021 15:47:16 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich wrote: There were NO Airforce personnel around where the B52's were dropping bombs so why are you lying yet again? There were NO Air bases anywhere near front lines. Also you haven't a clue about the bombing altitude. When you're stupid you should stop showing it so plainly. There was a river valley on the 17th parallel and The SAM sites were in that Valley. Give us some more of your stupid bull**** about what altitude we bombed from when a B52 was supposed to drop nuclear weapons from those altitudes and didn't need pinpoint accuracy. A SAM missile couldn't even reach that high moron. I don't have a number for the Vietnam Ware era B-52F ceiling. The earlier B-52B ceiling was 47,300 ft while the later B-52H ceiling was 50,000 ft. Bombing altitude seems to have been around 30,000 ft. https://www.boeing.com/defense/b-52-bomber/#/technical-specifications Various V-750 / SA-2 SAM missiles and systems in use had maximum altitudes of 23,000 meters (75,400 ft) to 35,000 meters (114,000 ft). I can't tell which V-750 version was in use in Vietnam, but my guess(tm) is the early ones went to at least 25,000 meters (82,000 ft): https://military.wikia.org/wiki/S-75_Dvina It scored the first destruction of an enemy aircraft by a surface-to-air missile, shooting down a Taiwanese Martin RB-57D Canberra over China, on October 7, 1959, hitting it with three V-750 (1D) missiles at an altitude of 20 km (65,600 ft). A missile with a maximum altitude of 82,000 ft should have no trouble hitting an airplane with a ceiling between 47,300 and 50,000 ft. When I was stationed in N. Thailand the F-105's equipped with missiles were flying over N. Vietnam apparently hammering missile sites in support of B-52's raids. -- Cheers, John B. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
OT: Tommy on Sat photos. Facebook hiding my entries
On Tuesday, February 2, 2021 at 9:35:08 p.m. UTC-5, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 02 Feb 2021 18:06:26 -0800, Jeff Liebermann wrote: On Tue, 2 Feb 2021 15:47:16 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich wrote: There were NO Airforce personnel around where the B52's were dropping bombs so why are you lying yet again? There were NO Air bases anywhere near front lines. Also you haven't a clue about the bombing altitude. When you're stupid you should stop showing it so plainly. There was a river valley on the 17th parallel and The SAM sites were in that Valley. Give us some more of your stupid bull**** about what altitude we bombed from when a B52 was supposed to drop nuclear weapons from those altitudes and didn't need pinpoint accuracy. A SAM missile couldn't even reach that high moron. I don't have a number for the Vietnam Ware era B-52F ceiling. The earlier B-52B ceiling was 47,300 ft while the later B-52H ceiling was 50,000 ft. Bombing altitude seems to have been around 30,000 ft. https://www.boeing.com/defense/b-52-bomber/#/technical-specifications Various V-750 / SA-2 SAM missiles and systems in use had maximum altitudes of 23,000 meters (75,400 ft) to 35,000 meters (114,000 ft). I can't tell which V-750 version was in use in Vietnam, but my guess(tm) is the early ones went to at least 25,000 meters (82,000 ft): https://military.wikia.org/wiki/S-75_Dvina It scored the first destruction of an enemy aircraft by a surface-to-air missile, shooting down a Taiwanese Martin RB-57D Canberra over China, on October 7, 1959, hitting it with three V-750 (1D) missiles at an altitude of 20 km (65,600 ft). A missile with a maximum altitude of 82,000 ft should have no trouble hitting an airplane with a ceiling between 47,300 and 50,000 ft. When I was stationed in N. Thailand the F-105's equipped with missiles were flying over N. Vietnam apparently hammering missile sites in support of B-52's raids. -- Cheers, John B. Wild Weasels? Cheers |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
OT: Tommy on Sat photos. Facebook hiding my entries
On Tue, 02 Feb 2021 18:06:26 -0800, Jeff Liebermann
wrote: On Tue, 2 Feb 2021 15:47:16 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich wrote: There were NO Airforce personnel around where the B52's were dropping bombs so why are you lying yet again? There were NO Air bases anywhere near front lines. Also you haven't a clue about the bombing altitude. When you're stupid you should stop showing it so plainly. There was a river valley on the 17th parallel and The SAM sites were in that Valley. Give us some more of your stupid bull**** about what altitude we bombed from when a B52 was supposed to drop nuclear weapons from those altitudes and didn't need pinpoint accuracy. A SAM missile couldn't even reach that high moron. I don't have a number for the Vietnam Ware era B-52F ceiling. The earlier B-52B ceiling was 47,300 ft while the later B-52H ceiling was 50,000 ft. Bombing altitude seems to have been around 30,000 ft. https://www.boeing.com/defense/b-52-bomber/#/technical-specifications Various V-750 / SA-2 SAM missiles and systems in use had maximum altitudes of 23,000 meters (75,400 ft) to 35,000 meters (114,000 ft). I can't tell which V-750 version was in use in Vietnam, but my guess(tm) is the early ones went to at least 25,000 meters (82,000 ft): https://military.wikia.org/wiki/S-75_Dvina It scored the first destruction of an enemy aircraft by a surface-to-air missile, shooting down a Taiwanese Martin RB-57D Canberra over China, on October 7, 1959, hitting it with three V-750 (1D) missiles at an altitude of 20 km (65,600 ft). A missile with a maximum altitude of 82,000 ft should have no trouble hitting an airplane with a ceiling between 47,300 and 50,000 ft. As for B-52 models I think that they were B-52D's and maybe F's. At least in the early '60's the ones from Barksdale AFB were B-52F models if I remember correctly. -- Cheers, John B. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
OT: Tommy on Sat photos. Facebook hiding my entries
On Tue, 2 Feb 2021 18:38:02 -0800 (PST), Sir Ridesalot
wrote: On Tuesday, February 2, 2021 at 9:35:08 p.m. UTC-5, John B. wrote: On Tue, 02 Feb 2021 18:06:26 -0800, Jeff Liebermann wrote: On Tue, 2 Feb 2021 15:47:16 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich wrote: There were NO Airforce personnel around where the B52's were dropping bombs so why are you lying yet again? There were NO Air bases anywhere near front lines. Also you haven't a clue about the bombing altitude. When you're stupid you should stop showing it so plainly. There was a river valley on the 17th parallel and The SAM sites were in that Valley. Give us some more of your stupid bull**** about what altitude we bombed from when a B52 was supposed to drop nuclear weapons from those altitudes and didn't need pinpoint accuracy. A SAM missile couldn't even reach that high moron. I don't have a number for the Vietnam Ware era B-52F ceiling. The earlier B-52B ceiling was 47,300 ft while the later B-52H ceiling was 50,000 ft. Bombing altitude seems to have been around 30,000 ft. https://www.boeing.com/defense/b-52-bomber/#/technical-specifications Various V-750 / SA-2 SAM missiles and systems in use had maximum altitudes of 23,000 meters (75,400 ft) to 35,000 meters (114,000 ft). I can't tell which V-750 version was in use in Vietnam, but my guess(tm) is the early ones went to at least 25,000 meters (82,000 ft): https://military.wikia.org/wiki/S-75_Dvina It scored the first destruction of an enemy aircraft by a surface-to-air missile, shooting down a Taiwanese Martin RB-57D Canberra over China, on October 7, 1959, hitting it with three V-750 (1D) missiles at an altitude of 20 km (65,600 ft). A missile with a maximum altitude of 82,000 ft should have no trouble hitting an airplane with a ceiling between 47,300 and 50,000 ft. When I was stationed in N. Thailand the F-105's equipped with missiles were flying over N. Vietnam apparently hammering missile sites in support of B-52's raids. -- Cheers, John B. Wild Weasels? Cheers Yup, that's what they were called although to be honest that sort of thing is very much the sort of thing that young pilots talk about. I never heard any of the ground grunts use the term :-) -- Cheers, John B. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
OT: Tommy on Sat photos. Facebook hiding my entries
On Wed, 03 Feb 2021 09:58:26 +0700, John B.
wrote: On Tue, 02 Feb 2021 18:06:26 -0800, Jeff Liebermann wrote: On Tue, 2 Feb 2021 15:47:16 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich wrote: There were NO Airforce personnel around where the B52's were dropping bombs so why are you lying yet again? There were NO Air bases anywhere near front lines. Also you haven't a clue about the bombing altitude. When you're stupid you should stop showing it so plainly. There was a river valley on the 17th parallel and The SAM sites were in that Valley. Give us some more of your stupid bull**** about what altitude we bombed from when a B52 was supposed to drop nuclear weapons from those altitudes and didn't need pinpoint accuracy. A SAM missile couldn't even reach that high moron. I don't have a number for the Vietnam Ware era B-52F ceiling. The earlier B-52B ceiling was 47,300 ft while the later B-52H ceiling was 50,000 ft. Bombing altitude seems to have been around 30,000 ft. https://www.boeing.com/defense/b-52-bomber/#/technical-specifications Various V-750 / SA-2 SAM missiles and systems in use had maximum altitudes of 23,000 meters (75,400 ft) to 35,000 meters (114,000 ft). I can't tell which V-750 version was in use in Vietnam, but my guess(tm) is the early ones went to at least 25,000 meters (82,000 ft): https://military.wikia.org/wiki/S-75_Dvina It scored the first destruction of an enemy aircraft by a surface-to-air missile, shooting down a Taiwanese Martin RB-57D Canberra over China, on October 7, 1959, hitting it with three V-750 (1D) missiles at an altitude of 20 km (65,600 ft). A missile with a maximum altitude of 82,000 ft should have no trouble hitting an airplane with a ceiling between 47,300 and 50,000 ft. As for B-52 models I think that they were B-52D's and maybe F's. At least in the early '60's the ones from Barksdale AFB were B-52F models if I remember correctly. Thanks. There was probably considerable overlap between B-52 models in service with various suffixes being in service at the same time. A 2,700 ft difference in ceiling altitude is only a 10% difference in SAM range since all the various B-52 models were operating around 30,000 ft. However, between researching the topic and writing this reply, I realized that I wasn't considering slant range and mountain heights. I read that the North Vietnamese tried to locate their SAM sites on hills and mountains. My guess(tm) is that had something to do with the ultimate range of the SAM missile or maybe shorten the flight time. It would be a rare day when the B-52 bombers flew directly overhead for the missiles to have the shortest range. More likely, there was horizontal range involved. 30,000 ft is about 5.7 miles. If the SAM launch sites were 5.7 miles away, the flight path of the missile would be 1.4 times longer. My guess(tm) is that the missile maximum firing altitude was based on the burn time of the rocket and unlike the bomber, had nothing to do with insufficient air for the engines at high altitudes. Is missile "firing range" and "firing altitude" are the same thing? The article at: https://military.wikia.org/wiki/S-75_Dvina seems to use these terms interchangeably. Or, are they the horizontal or vertical components of the ultimate range of the missile based on rocket burn time? This has no major effect on whether a SAM can shoot down a B-52, but does shorten the range at which it might be accomplished. -- Jeff Liebermann PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272 Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
OT: Tommy on Sat photos. Facebook hiding my entries
On Tue, 02 Feb 2021 23:18:31 -0800, Jeff Liebermann
wrote: On Wed, 03 Feb 2021 09:58:26 +0700, John B. wrote: On Tue, 02 Feb 2021 18:06:26 -0800, Jeff Liebermann wrote: On Tue, 2 Feb 2021 15:47:16 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich wrote: There were NO Airforce personnel around where the B52's were dropping bombs so why are you lying yet again? There were NO Air bases anywhere near front lines. Also you haven't a clue about the bombing altitude. When you're stupid you should stop showing it so plainly. There was a river valley on the 17th parallel and The SAM sites were in that Valley. Give us some more of your stupid bull**** about what altitude we bombed from when a B52 was supposed to drop nuclear weapons from those altitudes and didn't need pinpoint accuracy. A SAM missile couldn't even reach that high moron. I don't have a number for the Vietnam Ware era B-52F ceiling. The earlier B-52B ceiling was 47,300 ft while the later B-52H ceiling was 50,000 ft. Bombing altitude seems to have been around 30,000 ft. https://www.boeing.com/defense/b-52-bomber/#/technical-specifications Various V-750 / SA-2 SAM missiles and systems in use had maximum altitudes of 23,000 meters (75,400 ft) to 35,000 meters (114,000 ft). I can't tell which V-750 version was in use in Vietnam, but my guess(tm) is the early ones went to at least 25,000 meters (82,000 ft): https://military.wikia.org/wiki/S-75_Dvina It scored the first destruction of an enemy aircraft by a surface-to-air missile, shooting down a Taiwanese Martin RB-57D Canberra over China, on October 7, 1959, hitting it with three V-750 (1D) missiles at an altitude of 20 km (65,600 ft). A missile with a maximum altitude of 82,000 ft should have no trouble hitting an airplane with a ceiling between 47,300 and 50,000 ft. As for B-52 models I think that they were B-52D's and maybe F's. At least in the early '60's the ones from Barksdale AFB were B-52F models if I remember correctly. Thanks. There was probably considerable overlap between B-52 models in service with various suffixes being in service at the same time. A 2,700 ft difference in ceiling altitude is only a 10% difference in SAM range since all the various B-52 models were operating around 30,000 ft. However, between researching the topic and writing this reply, I realized that I wasn't considering slant range and mountain heights. I read that the North Vietnamese tried to locate their SAM sites on hills and mountains. My guess(tm) is that had something to do with the ultimate range of the SAM missile or maybe shorten the flight time. It would be a rare day when the B-52 bombers flew directly overhead for the missiles to have the shortest range. More likely, there was horizontal range involved. 30,000 ft is about 5.7 miles. If the SAM launch sites were 5.7 miles away, the flight path of the missile would be 1.4 times longer. My guess(tm) is that the missile maximum firing altitude was based on the burn time of the rocket and unlike the bomber, had nothing to do with insufficient air for the engines at high altitudes. Is missile "firing range" and "firing altitude" are the same thing? The article at: https://military.wikia.org/wiki/S-75_Dvina seems to use these terms interchangeably. Or, are they the horizontal or vertical components of the ultimate range of the missile based on rocket burn time? This has no major effect on whether a SAM can shoot down a B-52, but does shorten the range at which it might be accomplished. Well, I'm not a missile man but my understanding is that "range" means how far away will the rocket reach, i.e. a line drawn from the launch pad to wherever and "altitude" would mean how high the rocket could reach, probably fired straight up. -- Cheers, John B. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Facebook hiding my entries | Tom Kunich[_4_] | Techniques | 4 | January 27th 21 07:30 PM |
Facebook hiding my entries | Tom Kunich[_4_] | Techniques | 1 | January 27th 21 12:05 AM |
Facebook hiding my entries | Radey Shouman | Techniques | 1 | January 26th 21 06:32 PM |
Alaska Dalton Highway Trip Photos on facebook | captainwelch | Unicycling | 11 | May 28th 08 07:29 AM |
New Book From Tom Volinchak, Tommy Volinchak, Tommy's Tunes, Tommy Tune, Tommy Tuneman | Varsik Jabloerski | General | 0 | January 21st 04 07:23 PM |