Steve Davies

Yes. Contact was made some months ago.

Took me almost five years to build the story, and it might not make me any friends in publishing it, but Schultz’ honour deserves to be defended: Doc Schultz' Area 51 Mishap: The Details Revealed https://youtu.be/zidJB6qxlKs

For the uninitiated, can someone explain why a formation approach is any more/less risky than formation aerobatics or formation flying in wx? I get that proximity to the ground is a big consideration, but is there anything else that is inherently different about it?

Thanks for the considered post. I don't agree with the assessment that a 5-10 year capability gap existed between the F-111 and the Tornado. The Tornado IDS was on par with the F-111E (operating in Northern Iraq out of Incirlik) in terms of capabilities. These 1-11s dropped at night from medium altitude, alone and without ever seeing many of their targets (and they weren't running against Saddam's airfields, either). I am not sure how effective they were, but as one of the guys who there recently told me, "no one really cared about what we were doing". As for the F-111F with its PGM capability, they still went in low against airfields and other targets in the opening nights. So, they chose the exact same tactics. Sure, they didn't overfly the runways, but I think I have already established was not the cause of the initial Tornado losses. In fact, the F-models were extremely lucky not to eclipse the Tornado force's losses - three of them were badly damaged by AAA on night one. The F-15E, which had a PGM capability, went in low for the first couple of nights. One was downed by AAA on night one. At the time, it was the newest MDS in the Air Force inventory and was, in the same way as you characterise the IDS, optimised for a European conflict. But the capability gap didn't stop the same tactics being chosen... The F-16 had no PGM capability (some squadrons with LANTIRN did, but they were in the monitory), and they went in at medium altitude and dropped dumb bombs without any idea whether they were going to hit the target. So, no, not convinced that capabilities explain the disparity between sortie numbers and loss rates.

Hmm. Only one Tornado was lost on a JP233 mission and that was actually on the egress and several miles from the runway. IIRC, only two others were lost at low level - neither of which flew down any runway. A balanced view of the performance of the Tornado in ODS is that it did well. It certainly held its own against other strikers in theater, including F-15E, F-111, F-16, Jaguar, A-6, A-7 etc.

Hmm. I like Eddie Murphy a lot. His stand up comedy is brilliant. The original Coming to America was funny and a little edgy ("You may now clean the Royal penis") but that trailer makes the sequel look dull and potentially just a little woke.

Just rounding this out:

Good to know. Will check it out!

Thanks, DARPA Emailed you, but you can get me direct here: editor@10percenttrue.com

Well, that would be a happy coincidence, but the truth is that I don't remember - pretty sure we didn't meet.

If anyone knows how to get in touch with Robert Sweet, former A-10 pilot and former 476th FS/CC, can you PM me? Looking to do a story on Steve "Syph" Phillis.

Thanks. Will do.

There's one for MX folk, but to join you have to answer questions about HYD systems and tyre pressures! Couldn't find anything for aircrew, but it was a good idea.

This is a really long shot, and I apologise for the cryptic nature of it, but... Does anyone know MAC C-5 crewmembers who flew classified missions through the 1970s? Probably part of a unit whose mission included supporting AFSC and CIA. I would imagine it was a tight-knit community, but I don't know anyone who was part of it. Specifically, I am looking to speak to a crew who flew into Egypt on 21 Sept 1977. TIA

Thanks, both.