how about a Limey jet from the 60's??
Is that a “Bucaneer?” Been awhile, but I was at P’cola on quals when the Navy was looking at them, saw em' operating to and from the Lex.. Looks like one.
Steve
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
DREAM SHEET -- '60's-'70's
- Thread starter A4sForever
- Start date
Is that a “Bucaneer?” Been awhile, but I was at P’cola on quals when the Navy was looking at them, saw em' operating to and from the Lex.. Looks like one.
Steve
how about a Limey jet from the 60's??
Saw one once ... and as it was arguably the Brit version of an A-6 when I got a good look inside the cockpit, I gave thanks for the relative "simplicity" of the Intruder cockpit.
In point of fact, most of our Brit exchange Officers came from either the front or back seat of the Buccaneer. They all preferred the A-6 and it's side-by-side seating.
Did the Bucs ever see combat?
At least in the Gulf war carrying laser designators for Tornados, our Brit Nav exchange guy in 129 flew them, and in South African colors in the border wars of the 70's and 80's.
these aren't naval aircraft in any respect, but some pretty badass jets that might have been.
[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CF-105_Arrow"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CF-105_Arrow
looks like both would have had fine service careers had politics not killed them.
[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CF-105_Arrow"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CF-105_Arrow
looks like both would have had fine service careers had politics not killed them.
Don't know about the TSR, but the Arrow was widely regarded as well ahead of its time.
Aren't A-7s notorious for crashing off the end of the carrier and breaking a lot.
Never heard of that and besides, why would that be?
Well that's what I've heard from guys that I've known who've flown them. I got bombarded the last few days about horror stories about A-7s crashing frequently or literally falling apart in the sky.
I've never heard of that but I also don't know anyone who flew them. A4's or others in this timeframe, input.
Not to my knowledge. I believe the A-7 had a better safety record than many (most?) other Navy aircraft of the day, even though it was single-engine.
However, I believe when the A-7 was first introduced, the very early models had some serious engine problems and some losses. But these were quickly corrected with better and more reliable engines.
The aircraft also suffered some large losses over North Vietnam. But that was mostly because of their many numbers and repeated exposure to the most heavily defended targets, and not any aircraft problems (although their slower speed didn't help).
Related
Well I'm also talking about Post-Vietnam.
Second-hand info, but close to home... My brother was flight deck chief for VA-72 in the mid-80s and my current boss was CO of VA-192 in the early '80s... neither has any stories about the aircraft "falling apart" or anything like that. It did have its problems, but none to the scale you suggest.
Your sources are wrong. Or perhaps they just saw you coming ... ??
I flew w/ them for 3 cruises and they lost fewer birds than the A-6's or F-4's. The Fruit-fly's overall accident rate was some ridiculously LOW number and their combat related losses were low also (0.04%).
I waved them for hundreds of passes and their only weakness was slow power response when they got lo/slo in the groove.
I flew an A7E for @ 7.5hours (LSO Xtrain) and found it a breeze to fly. That's w/ no ground school, NATOPs check-out, or RAG ... and easy aircraft to fly ...
The things that ultimately killed the A7 were that it was a single purpose, subsonic, high radar signature aircraft.