Author Topic: ‘The Christmas Air Battle of 66’  (Read 6293 times)

Offline M.A.D

  • Also likes a bit of arse...
  • Wrote a great story about a Christmas Air Battle
‘The Christmas Air Battle of 66’
« on: February 18, 2012, 08:47:21 PM »
‘The Christmas Air Battle of 66

Written by - M.A.D
Edited by – GTX
Profiles by - coops213


It is 2 March 1965.  Following an attack on a U.S. Marine barracks at Pleiku, U.S President Lyndon Johnson orders Operation Rolling Thunder, to commence.  This is a massive bombing campaign of Hanoi and Haiphong.  The offensive destroys much of the remaining economic and industrial capacity of North Vietnam.

But whilst this massive and powerful bombing campaign leaves almost all of Hanoi and Haiphong in ruins, it has two major consequences, which the United States is not banking on.

Instead of cowering, the North Vietnamese see and in fact, declare this massive U.S bombing campaign to be a war of aggression against its population.  They subsequently strengthen their resolve to fight, rather than the envisaged capitulation.

This resolve by the North Vietnamese is spurred on greatly by this massive bombing action’s effect on the People’s Republic of China (PRC), who see the U.S military action as the long advocated threat and the United States’ primary reason for being in Vietnam – to attack and destroy the Chinese Communist regime.

This suspicion by the PRC is fuelled further by the ever deterioration of relations and ideology between itself and the Soviet Union.

The PLA advisors in North Vietnam are thus given the green light by their political leaders to encourage the North Vietnamese to up their resolve and to counter the American lead aggression by answering force with force.

To this end, the PLAAF secretly transfer two Harbin H-5 (IL-28 ‘Beagle’) Bomber Regiment’s (consisting of forty-eight aircraft in total) as a gift of the PRC to the hard pressed people of North Vietnam.  Although wearing NVAF marking’s, U.S intelligence was more than certain that these were both crewed and maintained by the PLAAF.  These H-5’s join the already small NVAF force of an estimated ten Soviet-built IL-28 ‘Beagles’ already in service.

U.S intelligence was taken completely off guard when on 29 May 1965, an estimated two Regiment’s of H-5/IL-28’s carried out a strike against Quang Tri city in South Vietnam.

The USAF and VNAF interceptors were very slow in responding to this first NVAF cross-boarder air strike.  Before the interception could occur, the ‘Beagles’ were safe back across the North Vietnamese boarder and airspace. 

Following this action, President Johnson ignored the recommendations of his military advisors and orders the attack and destroy the NVAF bomber force and the bases they operated from.

However, the North Vietnamese had already predicted that this is what any smart military strategist would do to eliminate the threat, and had thus already organised to quickly fly its force of ‘Beagles’ to the sanctuary and safety of the PRC, whenever a massed American bomber force was detected.

The political ramification’s of this open North Vietnamese offensive capability was felt through the allies who were supporting the Americans in the Vietnam War.  After more American B-52 strikes against North Vietnamese targets, the PRC becoming more and more concerned by the American willingness to use these strategic and potential nuclear bomb carrying bombers - especially combined with the misconstrued confusion of American political attempts to establish improved dialect with the PRC.  As a result, they now saw the need to send their own clear message of resolve to the American administration, and their military.

Thus, on the 8 August 1965 a flight of the latest Harbin H-6 (Tu-16 ‘Badger’) medium bomber, again in NVAF markings, made a deliberate show of force, by flying towards the South Vietnamese boarder, before turning around after USAF and VNAF fighters scrambled to, only to land at a NVAF air base knowing all too well that they would be photographed by US reconnaissance aircraft. 

Alarm bells now began to ring in the Pentagon about the presence of such capable and longer-range bombers.  The Johnson administration, through its National Security Adviser, Robert McNamara, commenced negotiations with its allies to provide a broader assistance to meeting the new North Vietnamese threat of offensive air operations.  These negotiations lead to the request of the Australian government to share the responsibility and burden to defend the South and the safety of allied troops against air attack.

This request was heeded with the result that at a press conference, on 12 September 1965, the Australian Foreign Affairs Minister announced that the Australian Government was to commit a Squadron of RAAF’s the brand new Mirage IIIO’s for combat deployment to South Vietnam, to help stem the threat of North Vietnamese bomber force.  The Minister for External Affairs made it clear though, that these aircraft were to used only in the defence of South Vietnamese air space and not take part in offensive operations over North Vietnam.

Only a day latter though, the Australian Government intentions were in trouble, with the French Ambassador contacting the Australian Minister for External Affairs to state very clearly that the French Government is against the use of their Mirage III fighter design being used in combat in IndoChina.  He reiterated his Government’s concerns by categorically threatening the spare parts and manufacturing expertise in the license production of the Dassault Mirage III design in Australia by the Government Aircraft Factory (GAF).

The Australian Government took this seriously, having already experienced similar political problem with the likes of the Australian Army’s Swedish designed and supplied 84mm Carl Gustav Antitank Weapons System and ammunition, as well as the Swiss Pilatus Porter liaison and observation aircraft.  With the new Mirage IIIO series of fighter/bombers they were not only concerned with its now ability to meet its commitment and promise to its main strategic ally, but its primary means of defending Australia.

The Selection of the French designed and built Dassault Mirage IIIO series of supersonic fighter-bomber was one of the most important and expensive lynch pins of Australia’s defence.  It was also of technological significance to Australia’s continuing aerospace industry, with GAF manufacturing the airframe and wings, whilst the Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation (CAC) manufactured the SNECMA Atar engine.  Too much time and money had been sunk into the program, just to cancel the entire program for the sake of one Squadron’s deployment in the eyes of the Australian Government and RAAF.

Embarrassing as it may be, it now looked as though the Australian Government would end up with egg on its face, by having to renounce its commitment to its ally, the United States.

To overcome this predicament, initially the RAAF considered the deployment of its older CA-27 Sabre and the CA-28 Sabre Dingo aircraft to South Vietnam to meet its pledge.  But at the last minute a Royal Australian Navy Fleet Air Arm (RAN FAA) Captain, who was back in Australia after a combat tour of Vietnam as an exchange-pilot with the United States Marine Corp, came up with a seemingly simple solution:

The RAN FAA Captain had flown Chance-Vought F-8E Crusader in both air-to-air and air-to-ground missions.  His now seemingly simple suggestion was that the RAAF should use an in-country U.S fighter, which negated the political issue with France, and also the expense issue of maintenance and serviceability, as this could easily be handled by the Americans already in place (though obviously supplemented by RAAF maintainers).

However this suggestion was not warmly received by all with a rift within the RAAF ranks as to the using of a naval fighter designed for carrier-based operations like the Crusader!

It did not take long though to prove the cost and operational effectiveness of the F-8E Crusader over other more expensive types like the McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II that the RAAF was truly hoping and pushing for.  The winning factor for the selection of the F-8E Crusader, over other interim designs (such as the F-102, F-104 and even EE Lightning), was the fact that the Australian Government and RAN were in agreement of the need for a more capable fighter-bomber in the near future to equip HMAS Melbourne.

Up until now, the Douglas A-4 Skyhawk was the preferred candidate to replace the de Havilland Venom fighters.  However, it was recognised that as a small and light carrier-based attack bomber, its fighter capability was limited and a compromise within the RAN. Also due to the experiences of modern warfare, the RAN knew it needed a fast and modern carrier-based reconnaissance aircraft.  With the possibility to sway the argument in favour of the F-8E, the RAN FAA now leapt on the idea.

From the Australian Government’s point of view, things were even simpler as using the Crusader in Vietnam was a practical and financially smart proposition in a bigger picture.

After further political discussion between the United States and Australia, it was announced that the Australian Government would lease sixteen single-seat F-8E Crusader’s from the US Navy and the outright purchase of four new-built two-seat TF-8A trainers.  The TF-8As being of use back in Australia for the conversion training of RAAF pilots and for evaluation of the type by the RAN aboard its aircraft carrier HMAS Melbourne.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2012, 04:56:05 PM by GTX_Admin »

Offline M.A.D

  • Also likes a bit of arse...
  • Wrote a great story about a Christmas Air Battle
Re: ‘The Christmas Air Battle of 66’
« Reply #1 on: February 18, 2012, 08:49:41 PM »
It did not take long for the RAAF pilot’s to lose their bias against the Crusader, because of its naval heritage.  The RAAF pilots quickly came to appreciate its excellent manoeuvrability qualities first hand, and of course its speed and acceleration, as many had up until then, pilots of the CAC CA-27 Sabre and the CA-28 Sabre Dingo.

In June 1966 the first RAAF fighter Squadron designated to deploy to South Vietnam was 76th Squadron.  The RAAF was however naturally very keen to rotate as many of its fighter pilots through this deployment, so as to maximise their modern air-to-air combat experience.
 
It was also decided early in the discussions with the American Government that the RAAF fighter contingency should be located as close to the North Vietnamese boarder as practical – so as to minimise interception time, whilst maximising time on station.

Initially the deployment appeared to be a non-event, with a lull in NVAF cross boarder strikes.  Many RAAF (and later RAN pilots, who were also rotating crews through the deployment) honed their skills and familiarisation of the Crusader in an unknown and unspoken practice of unofficially piloting USMC F-8 Crusaders in ground attack / close air support missions.  This practice stopped for a while, when one RAAF pilot was shot down by enemy and missing for three days, before being returned to his Squadron.  Never-the-less, this unofficial and unsanctioned training would pay off greatly, with many RAAF pilots learning the true performance capabilities and limitations of their new mounts when they were finally called upon to perform the air superiority mission they had been deployed for.

It was 3rd November 1966, when U.S. Ground-Controlled Interception (GCI) network detected what appeared to be a flight of low-altitude aircraft heading towards the DMZ from North Vietnamese aerospace.  RAAF Crusaders were the closest allied aircraft and thus were vectored to intercept.  The ensuing battle would be the 76th Sqn’s first blood in the Crusader.  The Crusaders intercepted six H-5 ‘Beagle’s’, flying in three 2 - ship formations at tree top height.  Diving to attack, the Crusaders hit one ‘Beagle’ with an AIM-9D radar-guided air-to-air missile at maximum range.  The Beagle careened into the jungle exploding, whilst a second was badly damaged by another Crusader’s cannon fire, its crew rapidly climbing before ejecting into the canopy of jungle below and being swallowed up, whilst their abandoned ‘Beagle’ continued on a ghostly southern direction for a few minutes longer, before it was put out of its misery by a seemingly pitiful Aim-9D heat-seeking AAM.  The remaining four ‘Beagle’s turned North and headed back into the direction they had come, whilst still at tree top height and full military power, and 23mm rear gunner fire trailing.

The seemingly easy kills before them were soon forgotten when the RAAF Crusaders came under intensive AAA fire from the jungle, forcing them to break off the attack and climb to higher altitude and safety.

Some weeks later on 17th December 1966, whilst being vectored to an intercept by GCI, RAAF Crusaders again came under intensive North Vietnamese AAA fire.  It was becoming clear that the NVAF where flying their ‘Beagle’s’ along AAA path’s almost as in to lure intercepting fighters into AAA ambushes, with each time with the NVAF bomber turning and fleeing.

Then on Christmas Day, 1966, a flight of 76 Sqn again scrambled to intercept what was no doubt another feint NVAF bomber attack on this special day of celebration.  But this time the 76 Sqn pilots elected to stay high above the area and confirm and pounce on the intruders.  But when they began to climb, the GCI reported that larger and higher flying bogeys were coming in from different directions.   Out of urgency, the remaining two ready flights of 76 Squadron were scrambled to support the original flight.

Soon the lead flight had reported intercepting a flight of Beagle’s, but were also under attack by SAMs themselves.  As the number of bogeys continued to increase, two flights of USMC F-8 Crusaders were also thrown into the medley along with some USAF F-4Cs and F-100s – this was rapidly turning into the biggest dog fight of the war to date. It was at this time that the 2nd and 3rd flight of 76 Sq reported that they were intercepting large bombers.  The large bombers were in fact H-6 ‘Badger’s escorted by MiG-17s, which pressed on their attack with determination.  It was also during all this confusion and excitement that a flight of H-5’s managed to slip by the now SAM and AAA engaged 1st flight of 76 Squadron to attack the new Khe Sanh Combat Base before the 3rd flight arrived to engage.

The ‘Christmas Air Battle of 1966’as it became known as by the Australians would result in the downing of two RAAF Crusaders, one suspected to an SA-2 ‘Guideline’ SAM and the other to AAA (with one pilot killed and the other ejecting and becoming a POW of the North Vietnamese).  Two more RAAF Crusaders would return to their airbase at Da Nang Air Base damaged, with one crashing on landing and the other badly damaged from SAM splinters (both pilots injured!)

The NVAF lost four H-5 ‘Beagles’ shot down (3 x RAAF kills and 1 x USMC kill - two to Aim-9B AAM’s and two to 20mm cannon fire); two H-6 ‘Badgers’ shot down (1 RAAF and 1 USAF - both to multiple AIM-9s) and four MiG-17s ( 2 RAAF and 1 each USMC and USAF – all to guns).  The NVAF was also thought to have suffered at least as many damaged bombers.
« Last Edit: February 18, 2012, 09:14:56 PM by M.A.D »

Offline M.A.D

  • Also likes a bit of arse...
  • Wrote a great story about a Christmas Air Battle
Re: ‘The Christmas Air Battle of 66’
« Reply #2 on: February 18, 2012, 08:53:03 PM »
It is needless to say that the NVAF now put a halt to these cross border bombing / strike missions, without adequate fighter escort or protection – the MiG-17s being not up to the task.  Likewise, the MiG-19 wasn't favoured by North Vietnamese pilots being considered a maintenance nightmare.  Finally, the MiG-21 had speed and performance but were considered too precious to waste in questionable actions such as this, being better kept close to Hanoi should the Americans launch more attacks.

The PRC made up the NVAF losses, in a way to save face.  But after this incursion and brief use of offensive power, the US Military went after the NVAF bombers where ever and when ever they were found.  In an act of self preservation these offensive assets now spent almost the rest of the Vietnam War in the PRC.

The RAAF would continue to provide a Squadron of Crusaders in South Vietnam, for the duration of their commitment to the war.  The lost and damaged aircraft would be replaced with attrition aircraft.  The RAAF and RAN pilots had also gained the respect of their USMC brothers in arms, and would return back to the early days of unknown and unspoken practice of unofficially piloting USMC F-8 Crusaders in ground attack / close air support missions.

It would be with some irony, with the end of the Vietnam War and Australia’s involvement, that when it came to handing back the leased Crusaders to the US Navy, it would be the RAAF pilots who pushed for the retention of the Crusader in the RAAF Order of Battle.  They were unsuccessful in this effort, though many pilots still found a chance to fly the Crusader in Australian service due to the RAN having also eventually acquired some.

Following a program to trial the F-8 Crusader, it was found that through a combination of an update to HMAS Melbourne’s catapult and arrestor gear and more so, development of a special new version of the F-8E – the F-8E(AUS) which, borrowing from the technical and operational experience of the French Navy’s F-8E(FN)incorporated significantly increased wing lift due to greater slat and flap deflection and the addition of a boundary layer control system, enlarged stabilators.

The RAN still had a need for a dedicated strike capability. As such, Vought was soon approached regarding the feasibility of an all-weather strike version based on its two-seat F-8F(Aus) design. Although deemed only a small order in the eyes of Vought, the company was more than happy to take on these RAN requirements, with the hope that the Australian Navy’s close relationship with Britain would go a long way in encouraging the Royal Navy’s Fleet Air Arm, who was at the time considering a more powerful Rolls-Royce Spey engine two-seat variant of its Crusader (in partnership Short Brothers) – known as the F-8Ks.
« Last Edit: February 18, 2012, 09:16:54 PM by M.A.D »

Offline M.A.D

  • Also likes a bit of arse...
  • Wrote a great story about a Christmas Air Battle
Re: ‘The Christmas Air Battle of 66’
« Reply #3 on: February 18, 2012, 08:57:49 PM »
Vought engineers came up with the two-seat F-8H(Aus), which incorporated a strengthened airframe and landing gear to take the added weight of its offensive bomb load. The RAN ordered ten of this variant.

Vought soon promoted this potential strike-fighter capability to the French, Argentinean and Brazilian Navy’s as a replacement for their subsonic Dassault Etendard and Douglas A-4 Skyhawk - though in the latter two cases, this also meant updates to the carriers as well.

The RAN would deploy HMAS Melbourne on one combat cruise to Vietnam in 1970.  This was only to be used in support of South Vietnam combat actions, with the primary purpose being for the RAN to deploy and operate in a modern combat enviroment, predominantly providing interdiction strike and close air support to allied forces.  During its deployment it carried:

•   One Fighter/Attack Squadron (6 x Vought F-8E(Aus) Crusaders)
•   One Fleet Air Defence Squadron (6 x Vought F-8F(Aus) Crusaders)
•    One ASW / MP Flight (4 x Grumman S-2E Trackers)
•   One AEW Flight (2 x Grumman E-1 Tracers)
•   One Recon Flight (2 x Vought RF-8E(Aus) Crusaders)
•   One ASW/SAR Helicopter Flight (4 x Westland Wessex 31As)

Upon return from the combat deployment in the South China Sea, the aircraft composition of HMAS Melbourne was changed to encompass the more capable two-seat, all-weather F-8F(Aus) and F-8H(Aus): 

•   One Fighter/Attack Squadron (6 x Vought F-8F(Aus) Crusaders
•   One Strike/Fighter Squadron (6 x Vought F-8H(Aus) Crusaders
•   One ASW / MP Flight (4 x Grumman S-2E Trackers)
•   One AEW Flight (2 x Grumman E-1 Tracers)
•   One Recon Flight (2 x Vought RF-8E(Aus) Crusaders)
•   One ASW/SAR Helicopter Flight (4 x Westland Wessex 31As)

The RAN would both fully appreciate and utilise the Crusader as its primary carrier-based air superiority fighter, attack and, reconnaissance aircraft until the carrier HMAS Melbourne was decommissioned on the 30th June 1982 and replaced by the new Tarawa class derived Australia CVL(V) which introduced the new McDonnell Douglas AV-8B Harrier II as its primary fixed wing platform.

Offline M.A.D

  • Also likes a bit of arse...
  • Wrote a great story about a Christmas Air Battle
Re: ‘The Christmas Air Battle of 66’
« Reply #4 on: February 18, 2012, 09:00:29 PM »
Some of the F-8F(Aus) & F-8H(Aus) Crusaders continued in RAN for about two years operating from land. They were used for dissimilar air combat training – representing Soviet MiG-21 ‘Fishbeds’(predominantly to retain pilot experience and retention whilst the conversion to AV-8B Harrier II’s was carried out.). These aircraft became excellent training tools for both the RAN and RAAF pilots in air-to-air combat and air interception. In many cases the RAN Crusader’s, to the embarrassment of the RAAF would beat their new and advanced F/A-18A/B Hornets in dissimilar air combat.

Offline M.A.D

  • Also likes a bit of arse...
  • Wrote a great story about a Christmas Air Battle
Re: ‘The Christmas Air Battle of 66’
« Reply #5 on: February 18, 2012, 09:03:37 PM »
In 1986 the Australian Government had commissioned Mr Paul Dibbs to carry out an in-depth report into Australia’s defence capability and likely threats.  Acting on this report (1987 Defence White Paper ‘The Defence of Australia’) the Government adhered to the recommendations that the ADF dangerously lacked adequate ‘Tactical Air Borne Reconnaissance’ assets -apart from four hard pressed RF-111C’s, which were used more in the strategic role!

The RAAF saw this as a green light to acquire the likes of the proposed state-of-the-art McDonnell Douglas/Northrop reconnaissance variant of its new F/A-18A/B Hornet – the RF-18A.  But the fact that its primary intended customer – the US Navy and the USMC had not purchased this variant, meant that the ADF’s requirement for four platforms would be prohibitively expensive. The RAAF’s expensive ambitions were dealt a further blow when the Australian Defence Association (an independent ‘think-tank’ on Australian defence and national security issues) declared that the ADF did not have to spend such ridiculous amounts of tax payers’ money to acquire an effective tactical reconnaissance capability since at the RAN Nowra Air Station was a small fleet of mothballed and pristine Vought RF-8E(Aus) Crusaders, which the Australian Government had been trying to sell since 1982.

 The Australian media took to this proposal, which soon forced the Government to direct an independent report to carried out - studying the possibility of returning the RAN RF-8(Aus) Crusaders into RAAF service.

This report was swift, and  deemed the most cost effective was to follow this proposition.  As such, the Defence Minister directed that the four RF-8E(Aus) and a single TF-8E(Aus) were to be refurbished for service in the RAAF in the role of Tactical Reconnaissance.
 
Part of RF-8E(Aus) & TF-8E(Aus) refurbishment included the removal of their variable-incidence wing support mechanisms (i.e hydraulics, hydraulic ram, hinge etc…) thus resulting in the wing being fixed – this was not a limitation though, due to the aircraft's land basing arrangements. It also saved both weight and minimised maintenance time and costs. The RAAF also specified that they were to be fitted and wired for a minimum of two Aim-9 Sidewinder AAM’s for self-defence. This was easily and cost effectively done by removing the systems of mothballed F-8E(Aus) at Nowra. Finally, also fitted was a data link system for delivering real-time imagery, a modern RWR system and two built in Goodyear ALE-39 Chaff/Flare dispensers.

These refurbished RF-8E(Aus) would become operational under the control of RAAF 77 Squadron, based at RAAF Williamtown on 18 December 1987.

Offline M.A.D

  • Also likes a bit of arse...
  • Wrote a great story about a Christmas Air Battle
Re: ‘The Christmas Air Battle of 66’
« Reply #6 on: February 18, 2012, 09:07:43 PM »
In 1992 work was started at RAAF Point Cook to restore an ex US Navy Vought F-8E Crusader, which had been donated as a gift by the USN from the Aerospace Maintenance And Regeneration Centre (known as the Bone Yard), in the town of Tucson, Arizona, USA.

The reason this particular airframe had been chosen was due to its historic significant to the RAAF and Australia. This particular F-8E Crusader had been leased by the Australian Government and used in combat by the RAAF under the command of RAAF 76 Squadron in Vietnam.  It was credited with downing a North Vietnamese (or thought more correctly a PLAAF) H-6 bomber during the ‘Christmas Air Battle of 1966’. With the war’s end these Crusaders were returned to their US Navy owners and expected to be never seen again.  In 1992 the Australian Government, RAAF and the Australian War Memorial decided that it was only fitting to commemorate this famous air battle and Australia’s involvement in the Vietnam War by, if possible, locating an ex-RAAF F-8E Crusader, restoring and permanently displaying it to commemorate this air battle at the Australian War Memorial’s Vietnam War exhibit, Canberra.  But the Volunteers and RAAF staff at the RAAF Point Cook Air Museum had bigger ideas.

In the end they would fully restore this significant Crusader back to flight condition, using the parts from mothballed ex-RAN Crusader’s located at RAN Nowra, NSW. This was made some what easer with the experience gained by the RAAF with the reactivation and operation of four RF-8E(Aus) and a single TF-8E(Aus) some ten years earlier.
In 1996 this specially restored and immaculately painted Vought F-8E Crusader, displayed in 76 Squadrons livery flew over the War Memorial’s of each State capital over a week The final flight of this restored Crusader was completed by a special commemorative flight when it was the highlight of a precession of RAAF aircraft over the Australian War Memorial on Christmas day of 1996 - the 30th Anniversary of the ‘Christmas Air Battle of 1966’. Although after all the time and effort by so many, the last flight by this impressive painted and historical aircraft, it is now on permanent display at the Australian War Memorial, Canberra, ACT.



Special thanks to Chris Cooper!  For his excellent profiles and on going patient’s with me continuously asking for changes to his profiles again and again and again!

Also many thanks to Greg (GTX) for his contribution and detail in editing this back story!

Regards

M.A.D

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: ‘The Christmas Air Battle of 66’
« Reply #7 on: February 19, 2012, 02:44:55 AM »
About bloody time you posted this... ;)
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline M.A.D

  • Also likes a bit of arse...
  • Wrote a great story about a Christmas Air Battle
Re: ‘The Christmas Air Battle of 66’
« Reply #8 on: February 19, 2012, 01:53:07 PM »
Thank Greg  ;D

My only question is how do I post or embed the profile pics into the story so they are full size (and no need to click on them)  :icon_crap:


M.A.D

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: ‘The Christmas Air Battle of 66’
« Reply #9 on: February 19, 2012, 04:52:20 PM »
Best way is to follow one of the hosted image techniques detailed here, here or here (amongst others).  Personally, I use Photobucket.

Regards,

Greg
« Last Edit: February 19, 2012, 04:55:27 PM by GTX_Admin »
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline nebnoswal

  • Live fast, die young, in a great pair of shorts!
Re: ‘The Christmas Air Battle of 66’
« Reply #10 on: February 19, 2012, 07:50:29 PM »
Loved this story the 1st time, good to see/read it again

Offline M.A.D

  • Also likes a bit of arse...
  • Wrote a great story about a Christmas Air Battle
Re: ‘The Christmas Air Battle of 66’
« Reply #11 on: February 19, 2012, 09:23:02 PM »
Thank you nebnoswal!
You endorsement and enjoyment is much appreciated


M.A.D 

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: ‘The Christmas Air Battle of 66’
« Reply #12 on: March 24, 2014, 11:15:07 PM »
How did I miss this, it is fantastic, great work!

Offline Alvis 3.1

  • Self acknowledged "Bad Influence"…but probably less attractive than Pink
  • The high priest of whiffing
Re: ‘The Christmas Air Battle of 66’
« Reply #13 on: March 24, 2014, 11:50:29 PM »
Truly believable and awesomely incredible!

Alvis 3.1

Offline Old Wombat

  • "We'll see when I've finished whether I'm showing off or simply embarrassing myself."
  • "Define 'interesting'?"
Re: ‘The Christmas Air Battle of 66’
« Reply #14 on: April 17, 2014, 09:35:25 PM »
Nice one! :)
"This is the Captain. We have a little problem with our engine sequence, so we may experience some slight turbulence and, ah, explode."