Recon (or lack thereof)

#1 Postby **Steve Cosby** » Sun Aug 29, 2004 10:51 pm

OK, the non-steroidal muscled one said the following tonight:

I found out the reason for no recons. I dont have the heart to say what the reason was, but if it was the reason I heard, its astounding.

Of course, he is teasing us.

Does anybody know what he is talking about at this point?

Guest · #2 Postby **Guest** » Sun Aug 29, 2004 11:35 pm

I hope to God we haven't lost any lives associated with recon. Is it possible we lost a plane or it went down and rescue is under way. NOT trying to start rumors, but what else could deter recon.

Help, does anyone know? :cry:

Brian

#3 Postby **Steve** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 12:30 am

I was wondering about that myself. I got the feeling he was more in disbelief than was lamenting some kind of loss. Hopefully he will (or the fact he said what he did) force the/an answer from someone.

Steve

chris_fit · #4 Postby **chris_fit** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 12:31 am

#5 Postby **Steve Cosby** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 7:49 am

Frederic1979 wrote:I hope to God we haven't lost any lives associated with recon. Is it possible we lost a plane or it went down and rescue is under way. NOT trying to start rumors, but what else could deter recon.

Help, does anyone know?

Brian

We absolutely would have heard about that. No, I wouldn't think that is something to worry about.

The one possibility I did think about was that the "J" model of the C-130 has been having problems and Lockheed is seeking to fix the problems at present. The WC-130's were to be replaced with "J"'s and they have at least one in the squadron now. Maybe that's it...

#6 Postby **Steve Cosby** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 8:21 am

I may have found what Bastardi was talking about. This is a story about Charley and how there wasn't enough aircraft recon in it (note the part about Mayfield). It's probably required reading for a number of reasons.

http://www.news-press.com/news/local_state/040829hurr-research.html

#7 Postby **PurdueWx80** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 8:25 am

I almost guarantee you this is what the problem was. JB absolutely hates talk of the North American monsoon, and it just so happens that the North American Monsoon Experiment has been going on this summer. I was thinking it would be over by now, but if not, I bet that's where the planes are/were.

#8 Postby **Steve Cosby** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 8:28 am

PurdueWx80 wrote:JB absolutely hates talk of the North American monsoon

I did not know that - I assumed it was the budget constraints.

The New Jersey air pollution deal was interesting, I guess, from the same standpoint.

#9 Postby **Steve** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 11:00 am

Very interesting read all around. But this blame goes squarely on the back of the federal government. What? They were studying the Mexican monsoon and air pollution in New Hampshire? That's outrageous. The buck needs to stop somewhere, and in my humble opinion, that somewhere is on the desk of our President. Someone needs to take a fall.

Steve

x-y-no · #10 Postby **x-y-no** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 11:14 am

Wow ... now that is scandalous.

Studying the "North American monsoon" and air pollution in NJ may very well be important research. But pulling the hurricane hunter planes off their primary mission to do it is insanity. :grr:

#11 Postby **Steve Cosby** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 11:19 am

x-y-no wrote:Wow ... now that is scandalous.

Studying the "North American monsoon" and air pollution in NJ may very well be important research. But pulling the hurricane hunter planes off their primary mission to do it is insanity.

What is even more insane is to blame the President for it. :roll:

But, yes, the primary point is scheduling the planes away from the area during this time.

The 2004 schedules are here:

http://www.aoc.noaa.gov/projects.htm

but, in typical Government fashion, you can't read them.

x-y-no · #12 Postby **x-y-no** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 11:25 am

Steve Cosby wrote:
x-y-no wrote:Wow ... now that is scandalous.

Studying the "North American monsoon" and air pollution in NJ may very well be important research. But pulling the hurricane hunter planes off their primary mission to do it is insanity.

What is even more insane is to blame the President for it.

Uhhh ... Did I blame the President?

No ... I didn't.

I'll be happy to let him take the fall, though. LOL!! :-)

#13 Postby **Steve Cosby** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 11:26 am

x-y-no wrote:Uhhh ... Did I blame the President?

No ... I didn't.

I'll be happy to let him take the fall, though. LOL!!

No, you didn't - Steve in Metarie, LA did.

Recon (or lack thereof)

Recon (or lack thereof)

Woulda heard about that

I may have found it

Didn't know that

I tell you what is even more insane...

Re: I tell you what is even more insane...

Re: I tell you what is even more insane...

Who is online