Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Yankee67 on June 01, 2015, 07:21:16 PM

Title: Book review - Flyboys
Post by: Yankee67 on June 01, 2015, 07:21:16 PM
I travel a lot, so about twice a month I'll buy a book to make the flights go quicker.  This month it was James Bradley's "Flyboys."  (James Bradley also wrote "Flags of our Fathers", about the flag raising on Iwo Jima.)

It was first published in 2003, so I'm sure some folks here have read it.  I don't want to spoil it but the book is about the sister island to Iwo, called Chichi Jima, also part of the Bonin Islands.  Iwo was manned by 20,000 fanatics that were ready to fight to the death.  Not many know, however, that Chichi Jima was manned by 25,000 fanatics who were also ready to fight to the death.  It was over Chichi Jima, during the Iwo Jima campaign, that George Bush's TBM was shot down.  Bush is one of the very few downed flyboys that made it back alive from the waters of Chichi Jima.  What happened to the rest of the flyboys that were shot down over Chichi Jima can best be described as an atrocity.  It was so bad that there weren't even international laws against it, because nobody thought a human being had the capacity to do that to another.  Bradley's book describes in detail what happened, who the victims were, who the perpetrators were, who got hung, who went mad, who survived, and why the United States government kept the exact details of the atrocities sealed for 50 years. 


Title: Re: Book review - Flyboys
Post by: Brooke on June 02, 2015, 07:12:10 PM
I, too, thought it was a good book.
Title: Re: Book review - Flyboys
Post by: Curval on June 02, 2015, 08:01:47 PM
Very good book.

The Japanese were some serious fanatics.  The cannibalism and attitude towards rape was not easy to read. 
Title: Re: Book review - Flyboys
Post by: mbailey on June 03, 2015, 05:23:51 AM
Agreed excellent book
Title: Re: Book review - Flyboys
Post by: Mister Fork on June 03, 2015, 11:59:24 AM
Yep, a great read - both informative and very eye-opening - Bradley is a great story teller.  I loved how his father would always tell his kids to tell media calling his house "say I've gone fishing to Canada" during veterans day or other military anniversaries.
Title: Re: Book review - Flyboys
Post by: DaveBB on June 03, 2015, 07:07:36 PM
There was something fishy about George Bush's shootdown.  Bush claimed his cockpit filled with smoke, he told his crew on the intercom to bail out, and waited as long as he could before bailing out.

The radioman on Bush's plane wasn't the regular crewman.  He was just filling in.  Bush's plane was the second plane in the flight to bomb Chi Chi Jima.  On the first plane was a gunner, who happened to be a good friend of the radioman on Bush's plane.  His job was to also monitor the rest of the TBMs on the flight.  When Bush's plane was hit, he claimed he saw no smoke, and that Bush bailed out almost immediately.  The TBM simultaneously went into a left handed descending dive.  Basically he claims Bush panicked and didn't give his crew a chance to get their chutes on and bail out.
Title: Re: Book review - Flyboys
Post by: Bodhi on June 03, 2015, 07:38:41 PM
There was something fishy about George Bush's shootdown.  Bush claimed his cockpit filled with smoke, he told his crew on the intercom to bail out, and waited as long as he could before bailing out.

The radioman on Bush's plane wasn't the regular crewman.  He was just filling in.  Bush's plane was the second plane in the flight to bomb Chi Chi Jima.  On the first plane was a gunner, who happened to be a good friend of the radioman on Bush's plane.  His job was to also monitor the rest of the TBMs on the flight.  When Bush's plane was hit, he claimed he saw no smoke, and that Bush bailed out almost immediately.  The TBM simultaneously went into a left handed descending dive.  Basically he claims Bush panicked and didn't give his crew a chance to get their chutes on and bail out.

Has the anyone else given credence to that story?
Title: Re: Book review - Flyboys
Post by: DaveBB on June 03, 2015, 07:42:15 PM
Quote
George Bush Sr Is No WWII Hero

By John S. McDonald
1-1-04



I am an 82 year old Navy pilot and I am outraged at
television's depiction of George Bush Sr.'s Pacific
experiences. Now, I hear a book is forthcoming -
Unbelievable!! I was in the Pacific at the same time as Bush
and flew the same Avenger airplane. A small room in the rear
of the Avenger was occupied by the radioman. The gunner went
through the room to get up to his turret. Both wore a harness
to which a chest type parachute could be attached - The gunner
had to come down out of the turret to put on his chute. Bush
said he was hit by anti-aircraft fire and the plane caught
fire. Bush's squadron was primarily used for patrol and saw
very little combat. Bush claimed he warned the crew, over the
intercom, to get out - got no answer and he could not yell
back because of the armor plate behind him. He decided they
were dead, so he bailed out. First, he failed to say he
switched his mike from radio to intercom. Then being blocked
by the armor is a bold faced lie! There was a sizable gap on
either side of the armor. I used this space to call to my
crew several times. The tough old Avenger simply did not
catch fire!! It had self sealing gas tanks. In six months of
operations, I never saw an Avenger catch fire. If the oil or
hydraulic systems were damaged, great clouds of white smoke
would stream out of the plane. I have no idea how many times
i saw planes returning to their carriers trailing smoke but
never a fire. What really happened? It was the pilots job to
hold the plane level and slow it down so the crew could get
out. Most certainly, the radioman was helping the gunner with
his chute when Bush panicked and left the plane. Then the
plane rolled into a dive giving the crew no chance. This
story went through the fleet and all the Avenger pilots i
knew were shocked at what they heard. I heard speculation of
a Courts-Martial. Bush was very young. By his own admission,
he reacted under stress. It is terrifying to have the cockpit
fill with smoke. Possibly, he can be excused for reacting to
fear and accepting it as another war time tragedy - but he
has been glorified on the History channel, a book is being
published, and worst of all, an aircraft carrier is to be
named for him. This is unbelievable!! Bush performed badly
and was certainly no hero. John S. McDonald



Quote
Chester Mierzejewski was the rear-facing gunner in Don Melvin's Grumman TBF Avenger when Bush was shot down. Being in the lead attack aircraft that Bush was following when he was hit gave Mierzejewski a clear view of the whole incident. In the run-up to the Republican national convention he grew increasingly concerned as Bush's wartime exploits were used as a vote catcher.

“That guy is not telling the truth,” he told The New York Post. Mierzejewski, a recipient of the Distinguished Flying Cross, maintained that Bush's plane “was never on fire” and that “no smoke came out of the cockpit when he opened his canopy to bail out...I was hoping to see some other parachutes. I never did. I saw the plane go down. I knew the guys were in it. It was a helpless feeling.”

Significantly Mierzejewski felt that by bailing out Bush might have cost the lives of William Little and John Delany, a good friend of his. It should be mentioned here that it was a standing order for naval aviators to try and ditch their planes in the sea and only to bail out if there was, as Bush claims, a fire on board. Gunner Lawrence Mueller, who was on the same mission, corroborates Mierzejewski's account. Mueller had kept a logbook in which he made notes as the squadron was debriefed after each mission. On September 2, 1944, the day Bush was shot down he wrote: “White and Delany presumed to have gone down with plane . . .no parachutes sighted except Bush's. . .” Mueller was also specific that no one had said anything about a fire on Bush's plane: £I would have put it in my log book” he told New York Post reporters in 1988.
Title: Re: Book review - Flyboys
Post by: Yankee67 on June 03, 2015, 10:13:57 PM
According to Bradley, the Navy, and a few other accounts:

The TBF was on a glide-bombing run, which was a typical late-war tactic in a torpedo bomber.  Instead of a nose diving attack, you took the TBF into the target on a straight-line, shallow descent at about 200 mph.  In Bush's case, he was the third plane on a four plane sequential attack run on the radio bunker at the highest peak on Chichi Jima.  Midway through his run, a Japanese anti-aircraft shell detonated below and in front of his engine nacelle.  His wings were untouched.  The anti-aircraft shell likely severed fuel lines and destroyed the oil cooler and oil tank upon detonation, and started a fire inside the engine compartment in the space under the cowling between the second row of cylinders and the oil tank up against the firewall.  The spreading fire resulted in black smoke obscuring the control panel and filling the cockpit.  His flight leader recalled that "you could have seen that smoke for a hundred miles." This occurred prior to Bush's bomb release.  Bush remained on course, released his bombs, and scored hits, according to his flight leader's after action report.  Upon release, he changed course from a northerly to a due-east heading (banking sharply right).  A squadron mate (Lt. Milt Moore) pulled his own plane up to the side of Bush's smoking aircraft at the end of this turn, but noted that their engine seized just as he came abreast of their cockpit, and Moore blew right past them.  They were at approximately 6,000 feet, and Bush's plane was dead stick. 

The normal procedure for managing a damaged TBF was to a) nurse it back to the carrier, or b) water ditch if there was no fire, or c) bail out if there was a visible fire.  Nursing the TBF back was not an option with a seized engine.  Water ditching was a procedure that Bush had already successfully executed earlier in the war.  However, the spreading engine fire was confirmed by Lt. Nat Adams, a San Jacinto F6F pilot assigned to provide cover for this mission.  Adams followed Bush's Avenger from their high six, and observed the engine fire.  "He continued his 200 mph dive on target and released.  I could see his engine flame and then spread to the fuel tanks housed in the wings.  As he leveled off and cleared the area, I followed him from above.  His plane continued to spew black smoke.  It was apparent that the shrapnel had severed a fuel line."     

Once clear of the island, he conferred by radio with his flight leader regarding his status, then instructed his crew to bail out.  He then added left rudder and dipped his right wing tip to ease slip stream pressure from the starboard side of the aircraft, so that the starboard radioman/bombardier's station door could be opened - the only egress point available to the turret gunner and radioman/bombardier while in flight.  According to Bush he kept the plane in this attitude long enough for his crew to have gotten out.  His altitude had dropped to 3,000 feet during this maneuver. 

From Bush's regular turret gunner, Leo Nadeau:
"No one ever knew which one bailed out with Mr. Bush, I would assume it was Delaney, because as the radioman/bombardier, he would go out first to leave room for the turret gunner to climb down out of the turret and put his chute on.  There wasn’t room in the turret for the gunner to wear a parachute. As a turret gunner, my parachute hung on the bulkhead of the plane near Delaney. We set up an escape procedure where he was supposed to hand me my chute and then jump, and then I was to follow him. The procedure took a couple of seconds. I felt bad that Delaney and Mr. White had died, I just had the feeling that had I been there, Delaney and I might have both made it out alive … that is, unless one of us got hit by AA.  Delaney and I had practiced our escape procedure constantly. He might have stayed to help White get out of the turret and delayed too long. it’s one of those things that never leaves your mind."

According to Bush's flight leader, one crewman did exit before Bush, but his chute failed to open.  This was presumably radioman/bombardier John Delaney, who would have exited first based on his station's position.  The third crewman on the flight - Ted White - was normally the San Jacinto's ships ordinance officer, and not an air crew member.  Ship's Ordinance Officer White had lobbied for and received permission from the squadron leader to join the flight just prior to the mission's departure.  The plane he ended up crewing with was Bush's, and Leo Nadeau remained back aboard the San Jacinto. 

Bush ultimately exited his cockpit, but was struck in the head by the tail of the aircraft, and briefly hooked his chute on the tail structure, resulting in a ripped chute.  A nearby gunner (Richard Gorman) in a TBF noted that as Bush's chute blossomed out, the plane exploded.         
Title: Re: Book review - Flyboys
Post by: DaveBB on June 04, 2015, 05:05:08 PM
That story plays out like a Hollywood action movie.  Makes for a good read.

Bush Sr has changed the story many times over the years, as is documented in this article:

http://whowhatwhy.org/2014/09/02/an-enduring-mystery-about-bush-41s-wwii-escape-from-death/

Title: Re: Book review - Flyboys
Post by: Bodhi on June 04, 2015, 08:45:13 PM
Perhaps.  But, unless there is irrefutable evidence to dispute what was initially put up, I am sorry, you just look like you're grinding an ax.
Title: Re: Book review - Flyboys
Post by: DaveBB on June 05, 2015, 05:47:39 AM
See Rule #14
Title: Re: Book review - Flyboys
Post by: PR3D4TOR on June 05, 2015, 06:10:43 AM
"The tough old Avenger simply did not
catch fire!! It had self sealing gas tanks."

Anyone saying something like that is a complete farking idiot.
Title: Re: Book review - Flyboys
Post by: rabbidrabbit on June 05, 2015, 09:58:23 AM
Anyone saying something like that is a complete farking idiot.

Self sealing gas tanks limited fires but hardly were fool proof.  Thousands of planes with self sealing gas tanks burned from enemy fire.  The statement is meant to pursued those who are ignorant and the assumption that others are that stupid thus the persuader is outwitting them through deception rather than a honest argument is telling.   
Title: Re: Book review - Flyboys
Post by: Bodhi on June 05, 2015, 10:37:30 AM
Almost all US WW2 combat aircraft have self sealing tanks.  They are designed to seal small penetrations or slow down fuel loss.  They are not impervious to leaks and fire.
Title: Re: Book review - Flyboys
Post by: Bodhi on June 05, 2015, 10:38:30 AM
See Rule #14
Title: Re: Book review - Flyboys
Post by: Yankee67 on June 05, 2015, 11:32:58 AM
Here's a decent account of Nat Adams' experiences (pages 10 and 11):

http://itd.idaho.gov/aero/Rudder%20Flutter/2012/RF_Fall_2012_Final_WEB.pdf

and another:

https://disciplesofflight.com/271-days-combat/
Title: Re: Book review - Flyboys
Post by: rabbidrabbit on June 05, 2015, 12:12:23 PM
See Rule #14
Title: Re: Book review - Flyboys
Post by: DaveBB on June 05, 2015, 04:28:14 PM
Quote
Bush leveled his
smoking aircraft and Nat heard him tell
his crew to bail out, yelling, “Hit the
silk! Hit the silk!” One crew member
jumped but his parachute failed to open.
Nat saw him fall to his death.

This would show that Bush had his mic set to "Radio" instead of "Intercom".
Title: Re: Book review - Flyboys
Post by: Bodhi on June 05, 2015, 07:43:18 PM
This would show that Bush had his mic set to "Radio" instead of "Intercom".

Or All.
Title: Re: Book review - Flyboys
Post by: rabbidrabbit on June 05, 2015, 08:33:17 PM
This would show that Bush had his mic set to "Radio" instead of "Intercom".

How do you know that Bodhi is wrong? 
Title: Re: Book review - Flyboys
Post by: DaveBB on June 05, 2015, 08:34:16 PM
Quote
The throttle  had a single  “talk”  button.  Unfortunately,  the pilot had to separately  select intercom  or radio,  resulting  in  ordinary  crew talk  frequently  broadcast  to the  entire  world.     

http://www.fisthistory.org/planes.pdf

Title: Re: Book review - Flyboys
Post by: Bodhi on June 05, 2015, 08:41:01 PM
Dave, I have to disagree with how you are reading that.  The pilot's mic/intercom can be used to talk on the air and to the crew separately.  It can also be set so that the intercom hears what the pilot does on the radio as well.  Which makes sense, so that the whole crew can hear specifics that might concern them.  That does not mean that the crew can talk on the air, just that they can hear what was said.

As for Bush Sr. broadcasting over the air (the order to bail out), it could be quite simply that he was too darned busy to worry about switching over to intercom only as he knew the crew would hear him call it.  That atleast one crewman made it out lends credence to that theory.

Title: Re: Book review - Flyboys
Post by: DaveBB on June 05, 2015, 08:50:49 PM
Hopefully I am misreading it.  But I think this is a picture of the TBMs intercom system control panel.

(http://www.fisthistory.org/Ships_files/image050.jpg)

Selector switch has ICS (intercom system), VHF (very high frequency) and MHE (???).
Title: Re: Book review - Flyboys
Post by: Bodhi on June 05, 2015, 08:54:31 PM
I don't think you are misreading it.  It looks like one of the multitude of intercom systems supplied for the Gov't during the war.  What you are seeming to misunderstand is that the crew can also hear the pilot on comms if the pilot chooses to set that.
Title: Re: Book review - Flyboys
Post by: Guppy35 on June 05, 2015, 10:40:46 PM
As much as I enjoyed Flag of our Fathers, I must confess to being disappointed in Flyboys.

The emotional investment Bradley had in his first book really showed.  In his second it didn't have that investment and it felt more like he just felt like writing a book.  It just came up lacking for me.
Title: Re: Book review - Flyboys
Post by: Yankee67 on June 05, 2015, 11:46:47 PM
Hopefully I am misreading it.  But I think this is a picture of the TBMs intercom system control panel.

(http://www.fisthistory.org/Ships_files/image050.jpg)

Selector switch has ICS (intercom system), VHF (very high frequency) and MHE (???).

That's not the intercom system control panel.  That is the late-war AN/ARC-5 Pilot's Receiver Control Unit.  The pilot's selector switch for intercom or radio would be on the pilot's remote mount control box.   Earlier in the war (1943), the radio set would be a GP-6 Transmitter, a RU-12 Receiver, and an RL-5 Intercommunication Control Unit (which was an "intercom system control panel").  With the early war set up, you had to switch the mike itself in order to talk to the crew.  But the newer AN/ARC-5's came out in 1944.  These sets are a little weird, in that the pilot could switch to ICS and give commands, but the crewmen had to select ICS on their remote mount control boxes as well, in order to talk back.  Regardless, if the pilot was communicating on radio, and the crewmen had their remote boxes set to radio as well, they could still hear and talk to each other.  The TBF was known to have an operational quirk where the entire crew would stay on radio and banter back and forth and clog up mission comms, and forget to all switch to ICS (which was meant to be the "banter channel").  Regardless, with the newer radio set, they could still all hear each other with their control boxes set to radio.  In fact, if a crewman was on ICS while the pilot was on radio talking to them, the crewman could hear him, but if the crewman tried to transmit back on ICS, any radio traffic from the pilot's position would walk over the crewman's ICS transmission.  And if the pilot was on ICS and the crewman on radio, the communication would be one way only, pilot to crewman.  This gave the pilot's transmissions - irrespective if they came from ICS or radio - priority over the crew position transmissions.
Title: Re: Book review - Flyboys
Post by: DaveBB on June 06, 2015, 09:59:26 AM
This is an RL-7, which the site claims only has minor differences from the RL-5:

(http://aafradio.org/flightdeck/RL-7.jpg)
Title: Re: Book review - Flyboys
Post by: rabbidrabbit on June 06, 2015, 10:20:16 AM
This is an RL-7, which the site claims only has minor differences from the RL-5:

(http://aafradio.org/flightdeck/RL-7.jpg)

What's your point?
Title: Re: Book review - Flyboys
Post by: Mano on June 06, 2015, 11:26:20 AM
Very good book. Recommend for any AH player.

 :aok