On 05/02/2016 09:48, Bob (not my real pseudonym) wrote:
> wrote:
>
>> On 04/02/2016 08:55, Bob (not my real pseudonym) wrote:
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 03/02/2016 02:10, Fabian Russell wrote:
>>>>> Interesting video.
>>>>>
>>>>> But why aren't the soldiers following?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Because the aircraft will have to do another circuit so that they're
>>>> dropped as close to the heavy drop as possible.
>>>
>>> Eep. If the bad guys are bad shots, they get a second chance at all
>>> the good guys.
>>>
>>
>> Hi Bob, how true that is.
>>
>> However, given the speed of the aircraft and the time elapsed from the
>> first vehicle's departure from the aircraft, how many miles away will
>> the aircraft be from the landed vehicles when the lads get out? Imagine
>> a a minimum of a five mile hike through hostile territory to claim a
>> couple of essential vehicles which, by that time, could already be in
>> enemy hands.
>>
>> Separation of heavy drop and personnel drop would seem common sense,
>> would it not, with the personnel coming in within a few minutes of the
>> heavy stuff? Even better, get the troops on the ground first to secure
>> perimeters and then await the heavy stuff!
>>
>> I know that they're dreadful pictures, but fifty years have passed and
>> the Kodak Brownie 127 did have some limitations. Here's me with a
>> vehicle I helped to rig and, and the next one, which I took, was after
>> parachuting in and assisting with securing the DZ, to allow instant
>> access to our vehicles and kit once they landed.
>>
>
> Impressive stuff!
Thanks Bob.
> My dad was a USAAF C-47 driver in Europe during the
> latter half of WW2. He had a few stories, though it was usually
> difficult to get him to tell them.
>
Well done, like so many of our dads.
> Good (if a tad crazy) folks. y'all are...
>
It's the only way to be!
;-)
--
Moving Things In Still Pictures
|
|