Jump to content
The Education Forum

Ray McGovern (former-CIA) Interview


Recommended Posts

Now if you have good sources that the Skyhawks actually put themselves in harms way to protect the B-26s to the point of taking fire, it would lend credibility to this scenario. Do your sources tell you that any US jet actually expended any armament while flying cover?

They were equipped with .30 and .50 cal, there to provide cover for the B-26s, the problem is Tom that the B-26s came an hour late, there was a firefight between Castro's planes and the Skyhawks, problem again is, Castro won. Remember, we only had 6 Skyhawks in flight, didn't take long to bring them down, now, had the B-26s and the Skyhawks worked hand in hand, more damage would have been done to Castro's army as there would have been 19 B26s plus 6 Skyhawks to deal with, would have been a big problem for Castro in the air, and then could have put boots on the ground, but before doing so, taking out Castro's primary targets were crucial that meant all of Castro's planes, than drop bombs in and around where Castro had his men would have open up to airsupport and gorilla warfare, which is what Richard Bissell wanted.

Edited by Scott Kaiser
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 174
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Would you? Personally want to know more about the Essex, it's crew, the Skyhawks and their roll in the Bay of Pigs 1961? Here are some of the surviving crew members of that day, and how to get in contact with them, I do it all the time, contact people that is. I like to expand my knowledge and not rely off documentation. Happy hunting!

http://www.hullnumber.com/crew1.php?cm=CV-9

Edited by Scott Kaiser
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now if you have good sources that the Skyhawks actually put themselves in harms way to protect the B-26s to the point of taking fire, it would lend credibility to this scenario. Do your sources tell you that any US jet actually expended any armament while flying cover?

...there was a firefight between Castro's planes and the Skyhawks, problem again is, Castro won. Remember, we only had 6 Skyhawks in flight, didn't take long to bring them down...

Are you saying that Castro's planes shot down the 6 US A4D Skyhawks?

Tom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SK: Jim may disagree that the airstrikes wouldn't have played a crucial part, but I don't think Jim was ever in the military either.

​My two sources were Lyman Kirkpatrick who served in the Army, and RFK who served in the Navy. Plus a military authority on amphibious landings.

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now if you have good sources that the Skyhawks actually put themselves in harms way to protect the B-26s to the point of taking fire, it would lend credibility to this scenario. Do your sources tell you that any US jet actually expended any armament while flying cover?

...there was a firefight between Castro's planes and the Skyhawks, problem again is, Castro won. Remember, we only had 6 Skyhawks in flight, didn't take long to bring them down...

Are you saying that Castro's planes shot down the 6 US A4D Skyhawks?

Tom

All, but one, it wasn't just his planes, but the ground artillery too that had been given him by other countries. This was pre Cuban missile Crisis and before Russia moved their missiles into Cuba as defense, remember, Russia was already providing Castro with artillery even before the Bay of Pigs.

Edited by Scott Kaiser
Link to comment
Share on other sites

SK: Jim may disagree that the airstrikes wouldn't have played a crucial part, but I don't think Jim was ever in the military either.

​My two sources were Lyman Kirkpatrick who served in the Army, and RFK who served in the Navy. Plus a military authority on amphibious landings.

Was I correct, when I said, "I don't think Jim was ever in the military either?" Not that I'm trying to prove a point here. You're right Jim, they did have military experience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought I was asking a respectful question, I don't believe I was being disrespectful at all by asking a simple yes or no question, I understand how this works now as this births a flashback to post #61. No worries Jim, it's late, and I'm off to bed, tomorrow is another day.

Good night friends, glad I was able to contribute even in the most smallest way. Thanks Tom for your back up material, I suppose it only strengthens this guy's credibility.

Good night.

Edited by Scott Kaiser
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scott:

You are saying that 3 T-33's shot down five Skyhawks?

Scott, you understand just the logistical problem here?

In 1961 a Skyhawk was an operational plane. It would be used a lot in Vietnam, and was actually used all the way until the Falklands War. It had a cruising speed of up to 600 MPH. It was a turbojet powered plane. It has small wings which made it ideal for maneuverability. It carried cannon and air to air missiles. In fact, it was so maneuverable it was used by the Blue Angels. It was in production until 1979.

The T-33 was mostly used for training purposes in 1961. They stopped making them in 1959. One of the planes that phased it out was the Skyhawk.

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scott:

You are saying that 3 T-33's shot down five Skyhawks?

Scott, you understand just the logistical problem here?

In 1961 a Skyhawk was an operational plane. iI would be used a lot in Vietnam, and was actually used all the way until the Falklands War. It had a cruising speed of up to 600 MPH. It was a turbojet powered plane. It has small wings which made it ideal for maneuverability. It carried cannon and air to air missiles. In fact, it was so maneuverable it was used by the Blue Angels. It was in production until 1979.

The T-33 was mostly used for training purposes in 1961. They stopped making them in 1959. One of the planes that phased it out was the Skyhawk.

"You are saying that 3 T-33's shot down five Skyhawks?"

NO! I'm saying that Fidel Castro's ground artillery helped! Ugh!

Now, I'm going to sleep, should there be anymore questions for me, I'm not ignoring you, I'll answer in the morning.

Edited by Scott Kaiser
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...