Yes, as if he doesn't deserve any of it. A simple search will show that he usually throws insults at people first.
Yes, as if he doesn't deserve any of it. A simple search will show that he usually throws insults at people first.
Okay, it just doesn't sound preplanned, more like the b1b was heading out. 20,000 feet isn't really close air support.
He is most definitely not talking out of his ass. The B1 is undeniably a strategic bomber it was not designed for close air support. Although operations in Afghanistan allowed us to employ the B1s in that role (because of JDAMS and more importantly because there lacked an enemy source of air power and air defenses) it is not its conventional role. Lately, close air support is provided by manueverable aircraft that can serve in a fighter/strike capacity (f-18 is a perfect example). However, it was not designed for the sole purpose of close air support. On the other hand, the A-10 is an aircraft built specifically for the role of close air support against enemy troops and tanks.
The Boeing statistic isn't all that convincing either. The amount of sorties flown for close air support likely far surpases those flown for strike warfare (strategic bombing). So, it makes sense that the B1 flew less missions yet dropped larger payloads because the mission called for strategic strikes on fixed targets. Although they no doubt loitered and provided an amazing source of firepower for troops on the ground, this is a new role that was specific to Operation Enduring Freedom. I'd be curious to find out if the B1 was used with as much frequency in Iraq.
Whether it is plausible, possible, could have happened or is in fact BS there is one point that stands:
The writing is crap. It's written from the perspective of an immature person with more of an interest in pseudo heroic bravado than any real intention to convey authenticity. It is commonplace. Many a soldier writes home to family and buds with a story to intrigue the uninitiate. We all want to see cool stuff and do great things (and some do) but the writing style of this piece carries with it the realism of a, forum post (was going to say "dime store novel" but that's not fair to the medium). Now, I'm not just basing everything on whether the soldier can put two words together in a compelling way; there are points that beg attention here.
1. "pitch black, crystal clear night". Hmmm, you'd think a trained killer could at least describe the environment in concise, relevant terms.
2. A B-1 Pilot offers to perform a "show of force" even though he asserts there is no one in the area. BTW, the Pilot's authority to perform the maneuver comes from centcom so there would likely need to be a really compelling reason for them to provide approval. "A few shots fired, but no big deal" isn't likely to cut that sandwich.
3. I don't know what anyone else's version of "God just hit you in the head with a hammer" is but breaking the sound barrier at 1000' above your head isn't going to amount to squat. Sure, you're going to hear it - but you're not going to need earplugs much less feel as though any kind of show of force has taken place. Been there done that: Stationed aboard the USS Missouri BB-63 I've seen a few sound barrier flyby's first hand. Impressive to say the least, "Hammer of God" type of impressive... ahhh no. And we're talking less than 200 yards out, so this B-1 pilot would have to have been right over their heads for them to feel it as described. I would hope to think though, a trained killer could tell the difference between 'just over your head' and one thousand feet (1000').
4. B-1, flying supersonic "stands it straight up" and blah blah blah... I'll let the physics and Jane's aficianado's address that one.
5. Soldier's referring to themselves as trained killers... I have quite a few friends and family in theater, two of which are Airborne. They just plain don't talk like that or refer to themselves that way much less write home of their grandiose exploits in such a fashion. Perhaps my family/friends are just a different sort of person. It strikes me as being odd is all.
6. Supposedly the pilot asks two questions which are replied to with "Stupid question. Of course we tell him yes." and "Very stupid question". There are just too many issues with that. One, let's say the questions were asked. My money is on the likelyhood that the Pilot is just a wee bit more intellectually capable than the ground troops (not a slam, just an IQ probability being that all we know of these particular soldiers is that they're "trained killers) and likely have a very good reason for asking questions to specify a manner or type of maneuver. To refer to the pilot as having asked a very stupid question in light of a very obvious answer - well, I'd say that particular trooper really isn't trained well at anything, much less killing.
I've spent hundreds of hours in the Combat Information Center (CIC) of the battleships and destroyer I've served on (Gulf War I inclusive) and communication is clear and concise for a reason. Strategic calls, no matter how plain Jane and "Obvious" to all involved are double checked and verified before executing. There is nothing "Priceless" about assuming the intentions of a joint military maneuver.
I'm not saying a "show of force" didn't happen or doesn't happen or that it isn't worth or exciting to write home about. I'm saying that it didn't happen the way the post portrays, if in this story it happened at all.
BTW, for the google inclined there is plenty of test footage of military planes performing sound barrier runs - much of it within 100' of audio/video recording; so one can judge for themselves, even if poor quality whether a "Hammer of God" effect would be experienced anywhere near 1000'. I've been there done that - so I call BS.
Cheers
The writing is crap. It's written from the perspective of an immature person with more of an interest in pseudo heroic bravado than any real intention to convey authenticity. It is commonplace. Many a soldier writes home to family and buds with a story to intrigue the uninitiate. We all want to see cool stuff and do great things (and some do) but the writing style of this piece carries with it the realism of a, forum post (was going to say "dime store novel" but that's not fair to the medium). Now, I'm not just basing everything on whether the soldier can put two words together in a compelling way; there are points that beg attention here.
1. "pitch black, crystal clear night". Hmmm, you'd think a trained killer could at least describe the environment in concise, relevant terms.
2. A B-1 Pilot offers to perform a "show of force" even though he asserts there is no one in the area. BTW, the Pilot's authority to perform the maneuver comes from centcom so there would likely need to be a really compelling reason for them to provide approval. "A few shots fired, but no big deal" isn't likely to cut that sandwich.
3. I don't know what anyone else's version of "God just hit you in the head with a hammer" is but breaking the sound barrier at 1000' above your head isn't going to amount to squat. Sure, you're going to hear it - but you're not going to need earplugs much less feel as though any kind of show of force has taken place. Been there done that: Stationed aboard the USS Missouri BB-63 I've seen a few sound barrier flyby's first hand. Impressive to say the least, "Hammer of God" type of impressive... ahhh no. And we're talking less than 200 yards out, so this B-1 pilot would have to have been right over their heads for them to feel it as described. I would hope to think though, a trained killer could tell the difference between 'just over your head' and one thousand feet (1000').
4. B-1, flying supersonic "stands it straight up" and blah blah blah... I'll let the physics and Jane's aficianado's address that one.
5. Soldier's referring to themselves as trained killers... I have quite a few friends and family in theater, two of which are Airborne. They just plain don't talk like that or refer to themselves that way much less write home of their grandiose exploits in such a fashion. Perhaps my family/friends are just a different sort of person. It strikes me as being odd is all.
6. Supposedly the pilot asks two questions which are replied to with "Stupid question. Of course we tell him yes." and "Very stupid question". There are just too many issues with that. One, let's say the questions were asked. My money is on the likelyhood that the Pilot is just a wee bit more intellectually capable than the ground troops (not a slam, just an IQ probability being that all we know of these particular soldiers is that they're "trained killers) and likely have a very good reason for asking questions to specify a manner or type of maneuver. To refer to the pilot as having asked a very stupid question in light of a very obvious answer - well, I'd say that particular trooper really isn't trained well at anything, much less killing.
I've spent hundreds of hours in the Combat Information Center (CIC) of the battleships and destroyer I've served on (Gulf War I inclusive) and communication is clear and concise for a reason. Strategic calls, no matter how plain Jane and "Obvious" to all involved are double checked and verified before executing. There is nothing "Priceless" about assuming the intentions of a joint military maneuver.
I'm not saying a "show of force" didn't happen or doesn't happen or that it isn't worth or exciting to write home about. I'm saying that it didn't happen the way the post portrays, if in this story it happened at all.
BTW, for the google inclined there is plenty of test footage of military planes performing sound barrier runs - much of it within 100' of audio/video recording; so one can judge for themselves, even if poor quality whether a "Hammer of God" effect would be experienced anywhere near 1000'. I've been there done that - so I call BS.
Cheers
To further this call, I have a friend who was actually IN Afghanistan and guess what, worked at Baghram AFB. He called BS as soon as I showed this "story" to him. He worked directly with the pilots and men and women on the ground all the time, coordinating their arrival and departure on all manner of aircraft at the base. He said that it is VERY highly unlikely that a B-1B would fly this mission at all, that it most likely would have been an A-10 flying cover for these guys. In fact, here he is, signing a 500lb. bomb on an A-10 prior to it's departure to fly air support of a ground operation.
A-10
OutHouse
Lifer
- Jun 5, 2000
- 36,413
- 616
- 126
Ummm from what I remember when i was in the USAF. Yes they do. The B-1 is a multi-platform aircraft that is suited for many different missions. CAS in Afghanistan is perfect for the B-1 for dropping many 500 laser guided 500 pounders into a cave.
Since there is no real threat against our aircraft in afghanistan i would suspect this story is plausable.
For those of you who don't know what a ring side seat to a sound barrier fly by looks or sounds like:
-------> Right-Click/Save Less than 75' from flyby.
Now, in that one clip - you certainly hear a significant "Bang", but you're talking less than 100', prolly between 50 and 75'. Your ears might ring a little after that, but no "God-Like" hammers here. Do some googling if ya want more. There's everything from Military tests, to Sea trials, to Airshow exhibitions showing the breaking of the sound barrier.
*****
Segue from the argument of coulda shoulda woulda use a B-1 for this or that, in Afghanistan or Disneyland - so what, it could have been used and might very well have been used. Does the availability of less expensive, less expensive to fly, easier to equip for the purpose planes have any bearing on whether some commander wants to take a joy ride in a B-1 for a "show of force"!? Yes, I'm being sarcastic; but the argument is whether the OP is relevant, not whether Janes, war reports or in-service proves the usefulness of the B-1.
*****
Sheeesh, now I'm sidetracked. S'pose I should get to bed before I go on another bent.
-------> Right-Click/Save Less than 75' from flyby.
Now, in that one clip - you certainly hear a significant "Bang", but you're talking less than 100', prolly between 50 and 75'. Your ears might ring a little after that, but no "God-Like" hammers here. Do some googling if ya want more. There's everything from Military tests, to Sea trials, to Airshow exhibitions showing the breaking of the sound barrier.
*****
Segue from the argument of coulda shoulda woulda use a B-1 for this or that, in Afghanistan or Disneyland - so what, it could have been used and might very well have been used. Does the availability of less expensive, less expensive to fly, easier to equip for the purpose planes have any bearing on whether some commander wants to take a joy ride in a B-1 for a "show of force"!? Yes, I'm being sarcastic; but the argument is whether the OP is relevant, not whether Janes, war reports or in-service proves the usefulness of the B-1.
*****
Sheeesh, now I'm sidetracked. S'pose I should get to bed before I go on another bent.
I reread my first couple of posts and I did not attack anyone or started about politics or whatever
if you hate Eurotrash because an Italian macho ran away with your gf, I can't help it, it also happened to me
the fact that the B1 also is suited for close air support doesn't mean that the story is true isn't it.
I have no problems at all admitting that the link that Hammer gave is new info to me and that the B1 was also used in that role in Afghanistan.
That being said, I still don't believe the story. If you have links or other sources to backup the story POST them. Is that clear now for all the idiots attacking me.
so spare me the morally superior European armchair general bs. You can impress your 12 year old cousin with your e-thug behavior (or maybe you are only 12 years old, that is also possible) but it doesn't work on me.
capice??
if you hate Eurotrash because an Italian macho ran away with your gf, I can't help it, it also happened to me
the fact that the B1 also is suited for close air support doesn't mean that the story is true isn't it.
I have no problems at all admitting that the link that Hammer gave is new info to me and that the B1 was also used in that role in Afghanistan.
That being said, I still don't believe the story. If you have links or other sources to backup the story POST them. Is that clear now for all the idiots attacking me.
so spare me the morally superior European armchair general bs. You can impress your 12 year old cousin with your e-thug behavior (or maybe you are only 12 years old, that is also possible) but it doesn't work on me.
capice??
Now freegeeks is kind of annoying and sometimes provides me with much amusement, but your statement makes no sense. I certainly live closer to B1s than certain Europeans, but I know almost nothing about them.
You can read up a lot about B1s, even if your country doesn't have them. It's not as if most people here have actually been involved in the design or strategic use of them.
did you look at the boeing link?
here it is again.
the b1 WAS "a strategic bomber it was not designed for close air support".
there's more on that boeing page. i suggest you read the whole thing before you reply.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 10K
-
Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 13K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 8K
-
Facebook
Twitter