On Oct 12, 2008, at 9:14 AM, richardsan san wrote: > On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 10:07 AM, Brian Lawson > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Oct 12, 2008, at 8:51 AM, richardsan san wrote: >> On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 9:43 AM, Brian Lawson >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> The A-4 aircraft that McCain was flying over Vietnam (and may >>> others of that period) did not have self-starting engines. A small >>> jet engine in a cart was used to get the turbines of the aircraft >>> turning so the engine could be ignited. What happened on the >>> Forrestal is that a starter cart was being used on an aircraft >>> across the flight deck from McCain's aircraft. The exhaust from >>> the starter cart was blowing on an air-to-air missile on another >>> aircraft and the missile "cooked-off", its engine ignited from the >>> heat of the starter cart. That missile flew across the deck and >>> hit McCain's aircraft starting the fire and causing it to drop its >>> bombs into the flames which in turn cooked off and exploded >>> causing more fire and damage to other aircraft, etc. >>> >>> I am no fan of McCain but he was in no way responsible for what >>> happened on the Forrestal. >>> >>> <http://www.forrestal.org/fidfacts/page13.htm> >> >> that linked story doesn't jive with the ^ above paragraph. just >> sayin' > > And how does it not? It clearly states "a Zuni rocket accidentally > fired from an F-4 Phantom parked on the starboard side flight deck > aft of the island. The missile streaked across the deck into a 400 > gallon belly fuel tank on a parked A-4D Skyhawk." McCain was an A-4 > pilot, not an F-4 pilot and he was in the A-4 which was hit. > > There are plenty of other web sites which talk about this incident. > The only difference between them (those which are not politically > partisan) is in how the missile got launched. One I've read reports > it was an electrical surge but that is the only report I've ever > heard which mentioned that as the cause. Most say for "unknown > reasons". My assertion that it was cooked off comes from multiple > documentary programs and other reading material I've seen over the > years. I'm something of a Naval history fan as my father was in the > Navy for over 30 years and was the editor of a highly respected > Naval History and current events magazine, The Hook. > -- > > it doesn't corroborate the details in your OP.
Which details? Be specific please. I'm not looking for a fight, I just want to know how you think it differs. Even the biography posted the other day agrees that McCain wasn't at fault. "Then, in an instant, the world around McCain erupted in flames. A six-foot-long Zuni rocket, inexplicably launched by an F-4 Phantom across the flight deck, ripped through the fuel tank of McCain's aircraft. Hundreds of gallons of fuel splashed onto the deck and came ablaze. Then: Clank. Clank. Two 1,000-pound bombs dropped from under the belly of McCain's stubby A-4, the Navy's "Tinkertoy Bomber," into the fire." -- Brian --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "StrataList-OT" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/StrataList-OT?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
