Cold War revisited

[MIDNJAC]

Hah! Great question! We flew with....drum roll....the Leatherman!! Still carry one to this day!!

View attachment 26279

Funny....first time I ever actually needed one in the jet, I was in my 2 seat tour and had a WSO that brought one. I did "surgery" on the ARS panel to try to bring it back to life and retract the hose/basket assembly, IAW my skipper's in flight surgery manual translated over rep freq. Didn't work, thing was super dead. Ended up trying to cut it with the old guillotine somewhere off the FL coast, which also failed to work. Then diverted to Oceana with our 22k lbs or so of remaining gas and landed, dragging that poor thing down the runway. Impressively very minimal damage....none to the jet, and really only the basket itself was ground down on the bottom/runway side. We looked like a real dumpster fire getting towed back to the line however, as my non-workup friends randomly taxied by and welcomed me home Missed almost a week of TSTA waiting for jet to get fixed......silver lining.

 

[Max the Mad Russian]

Actually not a big deal. They usually put you at end of recovery. It’s better than taking Barricade.

Look, the sources stated that first PALS system was installed on USS JFK at about 1987. It's understandable that at that time it just could make an approach and landing easier, but in time, if I understand correctly, in some cases the fully auto landing became possible. Have you ever participated in "hands off" trap? Was it possible on Tomcat?

This author thinks the nowadays carrier landing if far cry from the one twenty years ago, and the first ever carrier trap quite could be given to already winged Tailhook pilot (as he is sure it could be shifted from Advanced to FRS). Is that PALS so good now that essentially any pilot could make it from the first try?

 

[HeyJoe]

Look, the sources stated that first PALS system was installed on USS JFK at about 1987. It's understandable that at that time it just could make an approach and landing easier, but in time, if I understand correctly, in some cases the fully auto landing became possible. Have you ever participated in "hands off" trap? Was it possible on Tomcat?

Well, there I was circa 1985 when a Test Pilot from Carrier Suitability came to our Ready Room in search of an experienced RIO. I got selected to fly the first Auto Landngs at sea in the Tomcat with him in ne of our jets. We did at least a dozen traps running the deck. So been there, done that, got the patch!


If you are researching that, then like for JPALS and Magic arpet. Indeed, Technology has advanced quite a bit so that the X-47 landed without a pilot in the loop. In fact, JPALS was too accurate and caused premature wear and tear on the cross deck pendant (wire) by hitting precisely in same place every time.

That said, pilots still have to fly the ball well in case of a casualty to the black boxes. I will say that my dozen traps were “rails” smooth!

 

[Farva01]

This author thinks the nowadays carrier landing if far cry from the one twenty years ago, and the first ever carrier trap quite could be given to already winged Tailhook pilot (as he is sure it could be shifted from Advanced to FRS). Is that PALS so good now that essentially any pilot could make it from the first try?

That guy is full of shit!

 

[Brett327]

That guy is full of shit!

?

This author thinks the nowadays carrier landing if far cry from the one twenty years ago, and the first ever carrier trap quite could be given to already winged Tailhook pilot (as he is sure it could be shifted from Advanced to FRS). Is that PALS so good now that essentially any pilot could make it from the first try?

It's instructive, in this case, to see Max's take aways from this piece, and understand why he is so out to lunch 99% of the time.

 

[Gatordev]

As to the Baghdad run, we climbed to 25K and unloaded right down to 5K. Around 10K, the inlets are amazingly efficient and engines get quite a boost in that realm. You can feel it like an old 4 barrel carburetor kicking in.

Ah, that makes sense. Yeah, we were at 30K (I think...it's a little hard to tell in the blurry image from my low rent Vivitar point and shoot). You can see we were in a descent as well.

 

[Max the Mad Russian]

HeyJoe,


Why the latter B and D models hadn't been wired for any air-to-surface missiles after mid-1990s when A-6E fleet went off and Tailhook aviation became out of asset able to hit surface targets beyond 400 nms radius? Or Sea Control reconfigured VSs enabled to do so without F-14 involvement? And back for earlier A-model tactics: when working with USNWC staff about article, I've been told that about 1983 the former light attack people transitioning to F-18 and so receiving fighter training asked F-14 crowd than dominated AAW "thinktanks", why they don't have special tactics to defend MPRA aircraft from land-based Soviet and Chinese interceptors, and they didn't get any answers. Yet there was a curious look from Soviet side: why MPRA aircraft are absolutely on their own? Sometimes Icelandic-based P-3s were escorted by a pairs of USAF F-15Cs but there weren't Tomcats in kinda HVACAP around, or so the Soviet story goes.

 

[HeyJoe]

HeyJoe,


Why the latter B and D models hadn't been wired for any air-to-surface missiles after mid-1990s when A-6E fleet went off and Tailhook aviation became out of asset able to hit surface targets beyond 400 nms radius? Or Sea Control reconfigured VSs enabled to do so without F-14 involvement?

When the decision was made in 1994 to retire the A-6E, Admiral Allen insisted that the F-14 be given a precision strike capability. At the same time, a lot of resources were being focused on the Hornet. When a new weapon is introduced, the lead platform gets all costs paid for by the weapon. So the rich get richer. Hornet got all the toys because there was no money to integrate and test same weapons on the Tomcat. That said, most of the Tomcat Community was focused on the Outer Air Battle and never wanted to be saddled with air to ground mission. Some foresighted individuals did think we should but then there was lack of resources as mentioned above. The fact the Tomcat got LANTIRN at all was fought by so called Horner Mafia and if Admiral Allen had not been AIRLANT, I dare say it would have happened at all. The fleet under his “protection” did the demo and initial testing because NAVAIR and OPNAV did NOT support that initiative whatsoever.

 

[HeyJoe]

HeyJoe,

IMHO, the Think Tanks are just that...more like “Talk Tanks”....lots of thinking and talking but they are not in the Operational Loop whatsoever. Every year, the best and brightest went to USNWC and staffed the Strategic Studies Group (SSG) reporting directly to CNO, BUT lots of thinking and talking.... many other entities including CNA, etc

As far as MPRA escorts? Most of the time, they operate well away from carriers so it is not feasible. But when they do such as off Libya when carriers are close enough, then a simple request can be made.

 

[Notanaviator]

Most of the Tomcat Community was focused on the Outer Air Battle and never wanted to be saddled with air to ground mission. Some foresighted individuals did think we should but then there was lack of resources as mentioned above.

I appreciate the anecdote in the book regarding the borrowing of racks and that the 'whole program could have been put on an AMEX' if I'm remembering correctly. Good old fashioned American ingenuity! Find a way or make one...

 

[Max the Mad Russian]

That said, most of the Tomcat Community was focused on the Outer Air Battle and never wanted to be saddled with air to ground mission.

Was it the first time since F-8 times and probably the last one? Something similar had been heard from the old Crusader people, and there were two AirPac squadrons transitioned to F-14A directly from F-8, without intermediate Phantom time.

As far as MPRA escorts? Most of the time, they operate well away from carriers so it is not feasible. But when they do such as off Libya when carriers are close enough, then a simple request can be made.

It is quite hard to make the cruise speeds comparable, when Flankers were evaluated to consort Bears. Ours were the objections as to who will refuel the escort given the fact its tanks would become dry much earlier. Thereby the escorting MPRA becomes the full-range operation with big wing tanker support, and the phrase was coined "Yankees are doing much better since they have carriers to support the fighter escort", revealing total misunderstanding of the ways carriers operate with embarked CVW.

 

[Griz882]

Somewhat related as this is a history discussion, but the new SECNAV has picked a fine short range target for something he can fix.

New Navy Secretary Wastes No Time In Calling Navy History To Arms

The new Navy secretary has made naval history a primary focus, grasping that the Navy’s proud legacy can do a lot of cost-effective work in advancing the Navy’s agenda both at home and abroad.

www.forbes.com

The history community in the Navy is a bit lost and the History and Heritage Command is on the ropes. The new guy, likely recognizing he has a small window of opportunity, is looking to make the Navy's history relevant (and popular) once more and that is a plus for the service.

 

[Max the Mad Russian]

Well, a game with fire. History as a science is having three dimentions: educational, world outlooking and practical ones. Perhaps this SecNav knows how important are the first ("there's nothing new in this world, once upon a time that or this guy faced the same") and the second (there's nothing except everlasting checks and balances") ones but it would be better to remind him how dangerous the third is: this dimention is always a double-edged sword with no hilt. For example, the main meaning of Midway Victory of 1942 for all the WWII picture was that Lend Lease routes via Indian Ocean became much safer so at the fall of 1942 US Army Engineering Corps was able to put enormous sources in Iran to enlarge seaports, build highways and railroads and hunt the tribes just to make the goods' way to USSR smoother. Had USN lost Midway Battle, the Japs would press harder in Ceylon, land on it and make the submarine and air bases there to effectively cut those routes, simultaneously finishing the Pacific Lend Lease by the eve of 1943, and remember that at the same time the Brits had already stopped the Arctic way for almost entire 1943, and it all would leave the USSR with no help. Not so important for tanks and airplanes (less than 20% of total), but chemistry supply to produce powder and explosive stuff (84% of total), had it been ceased, would re-write all European history as such. So what the Nimitz/Fletcher/Spruance did at 4th June 1942? Opened the way to civilization in Iran and saved the USSR, i.e. hepled the future enemy by destroying present one. Was it the outcome they planned? Of course not. But it's history, so how you learn it is not the same as how you will teach it.

 

[Max the Mad Russian]

Back to Cold War: 21st Mar 1984, USS Kitty Hawk collision with Victor sub K-314 (slightly different from standard Victor Is, this boat had this nuke weapon aboard) when boat really lost contact and didn't regain it up until been hit by "80000 tons of mighty". From here one can read that right after collision "Aircraft Nos 615 and 616, SH-3Hs, HS-2, inspected the unlit submarine via AN/PVS-5A night vision goggles and sonobuoys without noting serious damage" and conclude that if sonobuoys had shown no shaft rotation at all but reactor still hot, the boat "is probably in no disaster". The boat's skipper really lost SA completely that time but let me ask: why escort or those same HS-2 Sea Kings didn't drop any sound grenades to get that snorkeling bum off the way and let the collision occur?

 

[ChuckMK23]

Back to Cold War: 21st Mar 1984, USS Kitty Hawk collision with Victor sub K-314 (slightly different from standard Victor Is, this boat had this nuke weapon aboard) when boat really lost contact and didn't regain it up until been hit by "80000 tons of mighty". From here one can read that right after collision "Aircraft Nos 615 and 616, SH-3Hs, HS-2, inspected the unlit submarine via AN/PVS-5A night vision goggles and sonobuoys without noting serious damage" and conclude that if sonobuoys had shown no shaft rotation at all but reactor still hot, the boat "View attachment 26508is probably in no disaster". The boat's skipper really lost SA completely that time but let me ask: why escort or those same HS-2 Sea Kings didn't drop any sound grenades to get that snorkeling bum off the way and let the collision occur?

Did the HS guys have goggles then ? A set of the awful PVS-5's in those days would have been a extreme rarity in the Navy helo world.