USAF or Naval Aviation?

[wilsonator]

Grunt Son,
I joined the Navy to land on the boat, you don't get that in the Air Force. I will say, having a unique perspective on the Air Force, they do have better toys (a lot more money devoted solely to aviation gets you that). Us Navy pilots (Marine pilots even more) pride ourselves by saying we'll get the job done with less. I am fortunate to fly Superhornets which is a pretty cool jet and I'd much rather fly it than an Eagle or Viper. There are other considerations such as it is much easier to get jets in the AF (if that's what you're after) and they do treat their people a lot better in terms of accomodations (golf courses, etc.) which seems silly but this is more than a job, it become your entire life at times and AF BOQs are nice. I feel I fit in personality wise better with the Navy but I'm sure AF dudes would make the same case about their service. You are doing the right thing by asking around. Meet people, see what they have to say, visit some bases and bottom line...apply everywhere. When it comes down to it the choice may not be entirely up to you, pilot slots fluctuate and timing is everything. Good luck.

 

[usmcecho4]

Now that man has some big stones... Did they just use the entire length of the ship combined with reversing the props/panic stomping the brakes?

This video explains the whole thing.

Semper Fi,
usmcecho4

 

[Flugelman]

Now that man has some big stones... Did they just use the entire length of the ship combined with reversing the props/panic stomping the brakes?

I think I remember reading somewhere back when they did it that the C-130 had been modified with anti-lock brakes. At the time the technology was pretty new. I think the article also said that the only Navy aircraft that had them was the A-3. Maybe A-4s can add some clarity to my foggy rememberances...

 

[jride200]

While we're on the subject of unusual carrier ops ..... Anyone care to remember the "motor glider" carrier ops during the Korean, early-Vietnam era, I think? huggyu2, have any good knowledge of this?

From what I've read, the U2 was not "too" difficult to bring aboard (its all relative, right?), because it has a low stall speed. I'm sure the long wingspan didn't leave much room though. And the bicycle style landing gear, providing no stability about the longitudinal axis, made it tricky too.

Before getting picked up to go to OCS, I interviewed with NAVAIR for a position in their a/c conceptual design lab (a think tank, performing rough designs of a/c as forseen to be needed 30-50 years out). The interviewer, was impressed when I mentioned U2 and C130 carrier ops, and said many of his employees were unaware of these things. He alluded to the fact that there have been other quite interesting a/c to operate from carriers. These however not being public knowlege ....

 

[subTidal]

While we're on the subject of unusual carrier ops ..... Anyone care to remember the "motor glider" carrier ops? huggyu2?

"heyjoe" remembers. Look at his earlier post on this thread.

 

[FrankTheTank]

OK... I guess I have to pipe in with my keen sense of spool...

Who cares.. All [Armed Services] are service to your country and all are similar and very different in job description..

If you want to fly:

the Air Force has lots of airplanes however many of those are heavies so Fighters isn't a given..

the Marine Corps has lots of Helos but an aviation contract is as close to a guarantee for becoming a pilot unlike the other services...

the Navy has a whole lot of ships.. Don't forget that could always be where you end up...

The Coast Guard.. Simliar to Marine Corp and the Navy.. Lots of Helos and Boats!

If you don't want to fly:

Then read again where this was posted--

Military Aviation in General Forum devoted to all aspects of military aviation!

Getting informed by getting perspectives from everybody out there is good headwork.. Asking a Naval Aviator if you should join the Air Force or a Air Force Fag if you should join the Navy is Moronic.. My 2 pesos

 

[HercDriver]

Now that man has some big stones... Did they just use the entire length of the ship combined with reversing the props/panic stomping the brakes?

According to my copy of "Herk: Hero of the Skies" at 85,000 pounds, the plane stopped within 267 feet; with maximum payload, the plane used 745 feet for takeoff roll & 460 feet for landing roll.

On their last landing they touched down about 150 feet down runway, stopped at about 270 feet and took off again from that position.

And yes, he was freakin' badass.

http://www.theaviationzone.com/factsheets/c130_forrestal.asp

 

[HuggyU2]

Anyone care to remember the "motor glider" carrier ops during the Korean, early-Vietnam era, I think? huggyu2, have any good knowledge of this?
From what I've read, the U2 was not "too" difficult to bring aboard (its all relative, right?), because it has a low stall speed. I'm sure the long wingspan didn't leave much room though. And the bicycle style landing gear, providing no stability about the longitudinal axis, made it tricky too.

The CIA or USAF started a program putting the U-2C onto the carrier. The U-2C was the smaller version of the current U-2.
The U-2's that currently fly started life as the "U-2R" in 1967, and grew to a 104' wingspan. To this day, the outer 70" of each wing folds, supposedly to allow it to fit into a carrier elevator.
The USAF repeated the tests with the U-2R, and they were done on the USS America. Flaps could go to 50 degrees, vice the 35 degrees that is normally considered "full flap". They had a hook, and a protective cage that went over the wingtips and in front of the tailwheel.
Supposedly, they got some landings stopped without taking the cable.
Takeoffs did not use the catapult.

If they decide to do this again, you can bet I'll try to be the first in line to give it a shot.

 

[Flash]

While we're on the subject of unusual carrier ops ..... Anyone care to remember the "motor glider" carrier ops during the Korean, early-Vietnam era, I think? huggyu2, have any good knowledge of this?

From what I've read, the U2 was not "too" difficult to bring aboard (its all relative, right?), because it has a low stall speed. I'm sure the long wingspan didn't leave much room though. And the bicycle style landing gear, providing no stability about the longitudinal axis, made it tricky too.

Before getting picked up to go to OCS, I interviewed with NAVAIR for a position in their a/c conceptual design lab (a think tank, performing rough designs of a/c as forseen to be needed 30-50 years out). The interviewer, was impressed when I mentioned U2 and C130 carrier ops, and said many of his employees were unaware of these things. He alluded to the fact that there have been other quite interesting a/c to operate from carriers. These however not being public knowlege ....

I have read in 2 or 3 books that I cannot remember off the top of my head, that talk about the deck being cleared on carriers for a few hours for all but a handful of personnel. Whatever flew and/or happened on deck was unknown to almost the entire crew. The time frame did nto fit with the U-2 flights.

 

[xj220]

Well, it can't be too hard to guess. Figure what aircraft would have the right wingspan to fit and that should help narrow things down. After that, look at aircraft that would serve a purpose on the flight deck. Air Force fighters are kind of out of the question since the Navy has their own. Bombers wouldn't fit, so my guess is the F-117.

 

[GulfBreezeGuy]

I read recently that the U2 had the lowest unit replacement cost of any aircraft currently in service. I found that surprising.

On topic: Are you even considering commissioning in the Navy? You haven't mentioned it, and since you have ruled out the AF, it is really down to the USMC or the USN.

 

[HarveyBirdman]

My ex-girlfriends father is a Lt.col out of Nellis.

The biggest #$*&ing #*^%&!!!!!!!! ever.

so was his buddies.


seriously. Go Navy.

 

[skim]

My ex-girlfriends father is a Lt.col out of Nellis.

The biggest #$*&ing #*^%&!!!!!!!! ever.

so was his buddies.


seriously. Go Navy.

Youre nailing his daughter, and you think he is a jerk (to you) cause he's in the Air Force? I think there is a deeper resentment towards you than you think...

 

[raptor10]

Youre nailing his daughter, and you think he is a jerk (to you) cause he's in the Air Force? I think there is a deeper resentment towards you than you think...

I concur, nailing a guy's daughter will give you a different outlook on the father...

 

[HarveyBirdman]

He was a jerk before we dated.

It just got worse.