PDA

View Full Version : Mugs, or Other Military Pilot Types



BigDon
2010-Feb-24, 09:36 PM
I've been accused of prevaricating in my sea stories at a function I was attending.

I was relating how the Russians would fly those big honkin' TU-95's out of Hanoi over our carrier back in the olden days and we would counter by having the Tomcats fly over the Bear's wingtips and then steering the aircraft away from the boat. (Ship)

The volumn of air over a carrier is that owning country's airspace. In otherwords, fun to buzz if you have official leave to do so. Like streaking that neighbor you don't like's frontyard.

I started catching all kinds of hootin' and cat calls. With "pointed questions" on how that "could possibly work". And one guy there was a Cesna pilot! I thought he should have known better.

So they don't believe:

Small dinky fighters are capable of forcing larger aircraft of doing anything it doesn't want to do.

(Tomcat? Small? Dinky? It weighs more than most fully loaded tractor/trailers! And can break mach 2! We got ours to 2.3. That .3 not being insignificant.)

They could maintain wingtip position over an evading aircraft.

(Oh Puh-lease. A school bus in free fall using it's front tires would have a better response time than TU-95. It took them 5 seconds to complete a snap roll!)

That any contact between the aircraft wouldn't spell instant distruction for both parties.

(I tried to tell them that if they wanted to, the Tomcat pilots could bounce up and down on the Bear's wing tips. With the drop tanks making a nice cushion. Bear pilots don't like that. They say bad words on the radio in Engrush.)

So it seems extraordinary claims, mine, need extraordinary evidence, yours.

kleindoofy
2010-Feb-24, 09:54 PM
... prevaricating in my sea stories ...
I don't know about you or your stories, but excessive prevaricating and even total farbrication of personal skills and achievements is not unkown on this forum.

RAF_Blackace
2010-Feb-24, 09:56 PM
Well I wouldn't call any of those claims extraordinary. I like the instant destruction bit though, too many people playing games I suppose and thinking any contact results in a spontaneous explosion.

I knew Don Archer, a P47 pilot in WWII that flew the "Wonderful Winnie". Having heard of many of his exploits and stories I would not doubt what you say here, in fact it sounds almost normal.

BigDon
2010-Feb-24, 09:59 PM
I don't know about you or your stories, but excessive prevaricating and even total farbrication of personal skills and achievements is not unkown on this forum.

You can really see that in Conspiracy when JayUtah gets a hold of a basement raised "photo analysis expert".

Part of the reason I post here is all the experts keep me honest, which in turn helps keep me from painting myself in a corner, story wise.

rommel543
2010-Feb-24, 10:05 PM
The following site has pictures showing some VERY close proximity to TU-95s

http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_285.shtml

Fazor
2010-Feb-24, 10:06 PM
. . . of a basement raised "photo analysis expert".

Or those jerks that think they know something about things like laws, cartoons, and insurance. [Homer Simpson voice] Man I just hate those guys soooo much! [/Homer Simpson voice] Oh. Right. ;)

Anyway, I'm eagerly awaiting confirmation, as this sounds like a cool story to third-person tell. You know, "I knew a guy that said this happened . . . "

And to make sure I have it straight, do you mean the Tomcats "steered" the TU's by getting in their way so they'd turn to avoid contact, or by physically pressing down on their wings with the 'cats?

BigDon
2010-Feb-24, 10:09 PM
Thanks Rommel!

korjik
2010-Feb-24, 10:10 PM
I've been accused of prevaricating in my sea stories at a function I was attending.

I was relating how the Russians would fly those big honkin' TU-95's out of Hanoi over our carrier back in the olden days and we would counter by having the Tomcats fly over the Bear's wingtips and then steering the aircraft away from the boat. (Ship)

The volumn of air over a carrier is that owning country's airspace. In otherwords, fun to buzz if you have official leave to do so. Like streaking that neighbor you don't like's frontyard.

I started catching all kinds of hootin' and cat calls. With "pointed questions" on how that "could possibly work". And one guy there was a Cesna pilot! I thought he should have known better.

So they don't believe:

Small dinky fighters are capable of forcing larger aircraft of doing anything it doesn't want to do.

(Tomcat? Small? Dinky? It weighs more than most fully loaded tractor/trailers! And can break mach 2! We got ours to 2.3. That .3 not being insignificant.)

They could maintain wingtip position over an evading aircraft.

(Oh Puh-lease. A school bus in free fall using it's front tires would have a better response time than TU-95. It took them 5 seconds to complete a snap roll!)

That any contact between the aircraft wouldn't spell instant distruction for both parties.

(I tried to tell them that if they wanted to, the Tomcat pilots could bounce up and down on the Bear's wing tips. With the drop tanks making a nice cushion. Bear pilots don't like that. They say bad words on the radio in Engrush.)

So it seems extraordinary claims, mine, need extraordinary evidence, yours.

None of your clains are even near extraordinary.

First, like you said, Tomcats arent small (Prolly not news to you :) ). 33 freakin tons at max weight according to wiki. This one complaint fails at first glance.

Second, formation training is standard for every air force (not caps, not calling you a zoomie :) ). Finding any number of vids with formation flying should not be hard. Heck, they refuel in the air! I think that requires the ability to fly in formation.

Third, finding instances of survivable collisions should not be hard. Not the most common result, but oddly enough, both F-14s and Tu-95s are designed to come back with damage.

So all three objections fail at first blush.

BigDon
2010-Feb-24, 10:10 PM
Faz, flying over or below the wing tip to prevent banking.

hhEb09'1
2010-Feb-24, 10:15 PM
Subscribed thread #4567

BigDon
2010-Feb-24, 10:16 PM
Korj, their argument was evading aircraft. I tried to tell them Bears don't "evade" like they think they're talking.

And if the Bears are actually "packing" they don't get within three horizons of the carrier.

rommel543
2010-Feb-24, 10:22 PM
Ok did a quick look on YouTube and there is a video about F-15s intercepting a TU-95. Now I don't know about the size comparison but the F-15s look like they're getting pretty close a few times.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMb9OmXDj4g

BigDon
2010-Feb-24, 10:23 PM
None of your clains are even near extraordinary.

First, like you said, Tomcats arent small (Prolly not news to you :) ). 33 freakin tons at max weight according to wiki. This one complaint fails at first glance.

They can sleep twelve, (on top), comfortably.

The flat foil design and aerodynamic swails providing numerous head rests. Plus the height kept the flightdeck watch from finding you doing so. As long as everybody was up before it got light.

BigDon
2010-Feb-24, 10:28 PM
Subscribed thread #4567

Translation?

(Good Lord, it's 2.30 PM! I'm still in my pajamas! Who do I think I am, Hugh Hefner?)

Be right back.

korjik
2010-Feb-24, 10:56 PM
Korj, their argument was evading aircraft. I tried to tell them Bears don't "evade" like they think they're talking.

And if the Bears are actually "packing" they don't get within three horizons of the carrier.

Have they actually seen a Tu-95?!?

How is a huge prop jobby going to maneuver fast enough to even inconvienence an F-14?

ngc3314
2010-Feb-24, 11:23 PM
Have they actually seen a Tu-95?!?

How is a huge prop jobby going to maneuver fast enough to even inconvienence an F-14?

Mind you, the Tu-95 as been listed as the fastest propeller-driven aircraft, and certainly qulifies as the fastest production prop plane (not that this would matter to a Tomcat). And one could underline "huge". Did anyone mention "bone-shakingly loud"?

Larry Jacks
2010-Feb-25, 12:43 AM
I've seen a lot of photos of US and Allied fighters escorting Bears. The Bear crews weren't stupid. They'd stow their tail guns in a safe position (usually full up) so they wouldn't appear provocative. They knew full well that if they did anything that looked threatening, they'd be on the receiving end of air-to-air missiles in short order.

Evade an F-14 in a Bear? What are they smoking? An F-14 was about 3 times faster and infinitely more maneuverable than any Tu-95.

Oh Puh-lease. A school bus in free fall using it's front tires would have a better response time than TU-95. It took them 5 seconds to complete a snap roll!

Gotta call you on this one. A snap roll (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ETc1mNNQg8&feature=related) is where you quickly pull back on the elevators and stomp full rudder with full ailerons - basically it's a spin maneuver in a forward direction. They'd be scattering Bear parts all over the place if they tried a snap roll. An aileron roll, maybe, but I seriously doubt it would survive a snap roll. There were quite a few fighters that were placarded against snap rolls.

captain swoop
2010-Feb-25, 01:34 AM
RAF Lightnings and laterly Tornados used to fly up and intercept Bears flying into British Airspace all the time in the ColdWar. It got so the regular aircrews on both sides knew each otheralmost on first name basis. They would gently 'shepherd' the Bears away.

Heck, we even used to play those games in the Navy, we joined the Screen of a 'Moskva' class 'Carrier' on it's maiden run into the Atlantic. One of their big Destroyer lumps tried to cut us in half. It's the only time I ever heard "Assume State Three, Condition Zulu" over the Tannoy, that was off Ascension Island.

Jens
2010-Feb-25, 01:38 AM
They knew full well that if they did anything that looked threatening, they'd be on the receiving end of air-to-air missiles in short order.


Honestly, I doubt that. I know very little about military aircraft, but just from the perspective of US-Soviet relations, I think a lot of it was sort of grandstanding. The military leaders never really wanted to get into a confrontation that might escalate. I remember one recent incident where a US spy plane collided with a Chinese fighter off the coast of China. I'm almost certain that it was an accident. They were doing exactly the kinds of things described in this threat, and ended up bumping, with disastrous results for the fighter pilot (i.e., death) and bad results for the spy plane as well (being forced to land on Chinese soil).

slang
2010-Feb-25, 02:03 AM
I remember one recent incident where a US spy plane collided with a Chinese fighter off the coast of China.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hainan_Island_incident

BigDon
2010-Feb-25, 02:14 AM
I meant the quarter turn one Mr. Jacks. My mistake.

Larry Jacks
2010-Feb-25, 02:14 AM
Honestly, I doubt that. I know very little about military aircraft, but just from the perspective of US-Soviet relations, I think a lot of it was sort of grandstanding.

If a Bear opened its bomb bays, it would've been shot down, especially during the Cold War. You can take that to the bank.

BigDon
2010-Feb-25, 02:23 AM
And by "packing" I meant equiped with anti-shipping cruise missiles on external hard points. We kept those out past 120 nautical miles. I think those Bears had the distinctive "big bulge" radars on their chins.

I could be mixing memories though.

Delvo
2010-Feb-25, 02:30 AM
Normally, the stress that any plane's wings are under is distributed across the whole wing, whereas a solid object pushing the wing up or down concentrates its force all in the same place. I'd expect that to have a pretty good risk of breaking the wing if done while it's already bearing the load of the plane's weight in flight. But then, the pilot might steer along with it anyway to avoid damage, like a fighter in a wrist-lock going where his hand is pointed due to his instinct to avoid letting his wrist get severely damaged. If the Tu-95 pilot fought against it, it could probably win because it has larger control surfaces than a fighter's and it has inertia on its side, but that depends on the wing being able to withstand the conflict, or on the pilot's belief that it could.

If we put a fighter on each wing, then one of the two fighters would need to be approaching upward from below, so its top surface would be the one touching, and that would create a lot of danger for its upright tail fins and canopy and the pilot. Due to that, I can't imagine anybody voluntarily being the guy on that side just for a needless and childish stunt. So if this was really done, it was probably just one fighter sitting on one wing, not by a pair with one pushing up and one pushing down.

Here's a quick & dirty size comparison with an F-15 on the left and an F-14 on the right, for those who are pondering that.

korjik
2010-Feb-25, 03:36 AM
I've seen a lot of photos of US and Allied fighters escorting Bears. The Bear crews weren't stupid. They'd stow their tail guns in a safe position (usually full up) so they wouldn't appear provocative. They knew full well that if they did anything that looked threatening, they'd be on the receiving end of air-to-air missiles in short order.

Evade an F-14 in a Bear? What are they smoking? An F-14 was about 3 times faster and infinitely more maneuverable than any Tu-95.

Oh Puh-lease. A school bus in free fall using it's front tires would have a better response time than TU-95. It took them 5 seconds to complete a snap roll!

Gotta call you on this one. A snap roll (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ETc1mNNQg8&feature=related) is where you quickly pull back on the elevators and stomp full rudder with full ailerons - basically it's a spin maneuver in a forward direction. They'd be scattering Bear parts all over the place if they tried a snap roll. An aileron roll, maybe, but I seriously doubt it would survive a snap roll. There were quite a few fighters that were placarded against snap rolls.

It would be really impressive to see tho. :)

Jens
2010-Feb-25, 04:12 AM
There were quite a few fighters that were placarded against snap rolls.

I'm sorry, I don't understand what that means. The only definition I could find of "placard" as a verb is "to attach a placard to." Does that mean they were forbidden from doing it, or that they were reinforced so that they could do it?

BigDon
2010-Feb-25, 04:15 AM
Forbidden Jens.

Jens
2010-Feb-25, 05:14 AM
Thanks Don. I sometimes have trouble with the jargon used in US government/military. I remember being perplexed when I first heard the use of "servicing targets" during the Gulf War.

korjik
2010-Feb-25, 03:48 PM
That probably isnt jargon, but literal. When it is a 'dont do this or you will DIE!' situation, putting up a sign is pretty common.

Larry Jacks
2010-Feb-25, 04:02 PM
That probably isnt jargon, but literal. When it is a 'dont do this or you will DIE!' situation, putting up a sign is pretty common.

Yes, in addition to putting a note in the pilot's manual, they'll actually put a placard inside the cockpit saying something critical like "spins prohibited." There's only so much space on an instrument panel, so only the most important info goes on the placards. Fortunately, they aren't written by lawyers.

Here's a collection of placards for the P-51 Mustang (http://www.pioneeraerosvc.com/p-51_mustang_parts_catalog.html). Concerning the Mustang, there's this:

Despite these modifications, the P-51 ** and Cs and the newer Ds and Ks experienced low-speed handling problems that could result in an involuntary "snap-roll" under certain conditions of air speed, angle of attack, gross weight, and center of gravity. Several crash reports tell of P-51Bs and Cs crashing because horizontal stabilizers were torn off during maneuvering. As a result of these problems, a modification kit consisting of a dorsal fin was manufactured. One report stated:

Unless a dorsal fin is installed on the P-51B, P-51C and P-51D airplanes, a snap roll may result when attempting a slow roll. The horizontal stabilizer will not withstand the effects of a snap roll. To prevent recurrence, the stabilizer should be reinforced in accordance with T.O. 01-60J-18 dated 8 April 1944 and a dorsal fin should be installed. Dorsal fin kits are being made available to overseas activities"

BigDon
2010-Feb-25, 04:27 PM
That probably isnt jargon, but literal. When it is a 'dont do this or you will DIE!' situation, putting up a sign is pretty common.

The same with "don't do this or I'll kill you" situations as well.

Saw an "international" sign once in Korea. On a road leading to some facility with manned towers. Showed two "Mr. Bathroom guys" in green, one with a helmet and rounded off rifle with a series of straight lines from the barrel to the other guy, who was falling over backwards clutching his chest.

I passed on the closer look option.

Larry Jacks
2010-Feb-25, 04:44 PM
Sounds like an effective sign. I wouldn't get too close either. Our military frequently posts signs reading, "Do not enter. Use of deadly force is authorized."

And they mean it.

Kaptain K
2010-Feb-25, 05:26 PM
Sounds like an effective sign. I wouldn't get too close either. Our military frequently posts signs reading, "Do not enter. Use of deadly force is authorized."

And they mean it.

Area 51

Larry Jacks
2010-Feb-25, 06:29 PM
Not just there. I've seen the signs displayed around certain military aircraft at airshows and at many military installations.

BigDon
2010-Feb-25, 07:40 PM
We didn't start playing mean with the zoomies at Nellis until some security buttmunches threw several of our non-flight officers face down on the deck and rousted them hard for crossing some painted white lines delineating some restricted aircraft parking area, that wasn't being used because we had the quonsets right in front of it.

Quite a crowd formed while this was happening. These three dipsticks then conmense to start joking about it until one, I remember he was a black E-4, looked over and noticed their audience. They actually did all that with their backs to us. Unbelievable. Now there is at least 100 of us not saying a word.

When he touched his buddies and they turned and looked they tried to take the high road with us.

A very good thing that Nellis detachments were considered a priviledge and there is a strong bias of the more senior enlisted present. I was the first person in the crowd to pull open his tool pouch, the velcro sound being very loud just then and not more than a half second later pert near everybody from the second rows back was doing like-wise. Everybody had the same idea, just I was faster off the mark.

I was reaching for my fifteen inch rachette with every intention of winging it into the lead SOB's face, with force, when the Power Plants senior chief stepped in front of me and locked my heels. Slapped the rachette out of my hand as I had come to attention with it down at my side and the two white pukes (E-5's) were trying to get their M-16's charged.

Stayed ugly until the Maintain Control warrents and a couple of the flight officers came boiling out of their quonset about ten seconds later.

Aside from some very amusing memories that have to stay private, (has anybody else here lifted up a floor board in a restricted building, wearing a black turtleneck and watchcap, while hold a flashlight in your mouth as somebody else loudly hummed the Hogan's Heroes theme?* :)) The only other good thing that came out of it was those three officers were nicer to us after that.




*More than a dozen of my fellow squadron members present were graduates of SAR training and Escape and Evasion courses. Following their lead you couldn't go wrong. They even disabled and then re-enabled, the alarm system as we had a genuine SEAL with us too. They're clever that way. (After graduation, of which we were all proud of him, he came back to us momentarily. Long story. )

rommel543
2010-Feb-25, 08:47 PM
Growing up I always wanted to be in Canadian Special Forces (now called CSOR). Having a hole blown in your leg by a 270 at the age of ten kind of puts a damper on that sort of thing though.

ngc3314
2010-Feb-25, 10:24 PM
Not just there. I've seen the signs displayed around certain military aircraft at airshows and at many military installations.

And wording very like that back in the days when there were Titan missile installations just off some main roads in Arizona.

korjik
2010-Feb-25, 10:37 PM
Our SCIF had a couple of those too.

vonmazur
2010-Feb-25, 11:37 PM
I was an Army Aviator at age 19, and besides two tours of combat duty in l'Indochine, there were other assignments....some of which were quite strange, and it is my opinion that Don is not shovelling pferdemerde, if anything,he is quite restrained.....

Note: Don, when referring to the Officers ranked between the Master Chief and Ensign, it is "Warrant Officer"....Sorry I could not resist....If you could spell it right, they made you one in 1967!!

Dale

captain swoop
2010-Feb-26, 12:21 AM
Do US Warrant Officers hold a 'Warrant' or is it just a title? IN the British Forces they hold a Warrant from the Queen.

mugaliens
2010-Feb-26, 12:52 AM
BD, thanks for the nod. To KD and a couple of others, two weeks ago I had breakfast with one of the other members of this forum. He can corroborate claims, and since we were both in military units which interact with one another (I airdropped his type of people), we both know that no amount of being a history buff will imbue one with the knowledge, experience, and "war stories" we shared with one another during our 4-1/2 hours breakfast. BTW, the sunburn/tan I got during the second two hours of our conversation in the parking lot finally faded! Lol.


I've been accused of prevaricating in my sea stories at a function I was attending.

You were bow-legged? Oops, sorry - that's the root of the word. Ok, I looked it up, so I'm good.


I was relating how the Russians would fly those big honkin' TU-95's out of Hanoi over our carrier back in the olden days and we would counter by having the Tomcats fly over the Bear's wingtips and then steering the aircraft away from the boat. (Ship)

There's a certain maneuver with a a very precisely prescribed flight pattern which is considered the internationally acceptable means of overflying a ship of foreign registry, particularly when it's military and the overflying aircraft is military.


The volumn of air over a carrier is that owning country's airspace.

The interior of military aircraft are considered sovereign territory, that is, with the same international protections against intrusion by host nation forces as an embassy. I don't know if that extends to the airspace above ships, however, at least not when certain protocols are followed. Without those protocols...


I started catching all kinds of hootin' and cat calls. With "pointed questions" on how that "could possibly work".

The Internet abounds with people who wrongly think they either have all the answers, or wrongly believe others who are in the know about an issue by way of duty, training, and experience, aren't. They're not that difficult to spot - just look for derisive comments of the sort you experienced.


So they don't believe:

Small dinky fighters are capable of forcing larger aircraft of doing anything it doesn't want to do.

...

That any contact between the aircraft wouldn't spell instant distruction for both parties.

A Super Hornet can't physically force a TU-95 to deviate from course. They can, however, direct it away under threat of military force. Collisions between larger and smaller aircraft are rare, but the larger aircraft almost always made it home with minimal damage while the smaller aircraft was destroyed. The incident between the SB-70 and one of it's chase planes comes to mind.


I tried to tell them that if they wanted to, the Tomcat pilots could bounce up and down on the Bear's wing tips. With the drop tanks making a nice cushion. Bear pilots don't like that. They say bad words on the radio in Engrush.

I'm skeptical simply due to the the aerodynamics between aircraft. Generally speaking, they tend to sort of suck themselves together, often catestrophically, if they get too close in flight. Depends on where, though. I do know a Tomcat in a sixG pullup is experiencing 300,000 lbs of force, but it's distrubuted as it was designed to handle, over the wings and the airframe. Simply contacting another aircraft could easily generation 30,000 lbs of pressure, but localized. If both surfaces are smooth, some bending of sheet metal would still occur, as evidenced by what happens if a Herk pilot overrotates and too soon on takeoff or lands with too high of an attitude - the tail skid gets the snot bent out of it, and often there's damage to the ramp on which the tailskid is mounted.

Most aircraft have several hand-sized antenna along the tops and bottoms of the fuselage. At the very least, upon any such contact, they'd break off. At worst, they'd gash the skin of the other aircraft, possibly taking out hydraulic lines, cables, or puncturing fuel tanks.

As for the TU-95, I've visited the interior of a Bear, but never encountered them in flight. Generally, both their and our missions were one of avoidance, rather than confrontation. It was the job of the fighters, both Navy and Air Force, to confront the the Bears.

I know it's not much, but hope this helps.

mugaliens
2010-Feb-26, 01:26 AM
Do US Warrant Officers hold a 'Warrant' or is it just a title? IN the British Forces they hold a Warrant from the Queen.

It's a warrant commission. They are ranked above all enlisted ranks, as well as above officer candidates (academy cadets and those in the services' officer canditate/training schools), but below that of an O-1.

Their primary duties are as technical experts. They fly helos and King Airs in the Army, for example, as well as serving in other highly-technical specialties.

In older days, a "warrant" was considered a writ of trust, but not one of command. These days, W-2s through W-5s (CWOs) do command, and their commission is from the President, same as that of officers.

Larry Jacks
2010-Feb-26, 01:38 AM
The incident between the SB-70 and one of it's chase planes comes to mind.

That was the XB-70 (prototype number 2) that was struck by an F-104 flown by Joe Walker. He likely flew into the powerful vortices and lost control of his plane. Both planes crashed. Walker was killed - probably instantly. One of the two test pilots in the XB-70 was killed while the other barely managed to eject in time.

And it was all for a publicity photo! There was a group of 5 planes flying in formation, all powered by GE engines (XB-70, T-38, F-5, F-4, F-104). GE wanted a publicity photo. Two planes destroyed, two lives lost. This YouTube video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEP7niGqiNg&feature=related) shows the crash sequence of photos.

Doesn't seem worth it to me.

Middenrat
2010-Feb-26, 02:18 AM
Well I read all the way to thelast post, darn it Larry Jacks has beaten me to it with 'vortices'. These are what I understood the OP to be alluding to, not contact deflection but robbing a wing of lift by guiding your wingtip vortex into the lift surfaces of your adversary.

Jens
2010-Feb-26, 02:48 AM
Doesn't seem worth it to me.

As they say, though, the retrospectoscope is a very powerful instrument. If nothing had gone wrong, and the picture had been taken, everybody would have been happy. I doubt that they went into it really saying, "we know this is a very dangerous thing we're doing, but need it for the picture."

Ara Pacis
2010-Feb-26, 03:18 AM
"need it for the picture."

Rather common last words if you know many photographers.

BigDon
2010-Feb-26, 04:22 AM
Mugs, they were also expert at squeezing every drop of work out of a crew already considered an elite.

Your Division Officers and the Master Chief of The Command were one thing.

Maintainance Control was another.

One difference in the Nellis trip was sharing spaces with the flightcrews, something my shop didn't do often. (Avionics and Fire Control) Which was a lot like camping and sharing a tent with your parents. If "Daddy" is torqued and starts yelling at some of the J.O.'s you all get reaaal busy with the paperwork, corrosision control or studying the grain in the fake paneling.

Apparently if you are in a four on four combat excercise and the skipper orders you to break right, well, he expects you to break right. And breaking left instead and getting shot down because of it, there's going to be yellin'. (This was a graded excercise).

Commander Ernst racked up the entire enemy flight himself. Saving the other two aircraft in the process. That's why he was Skipper. He wasn't strapped into the Tomcat, the Tomcat was strapped on to him. Believe that.

I've watched him from a TACTS trailer and never saw anything like him and some of the other pilots on TV.

How that officer (Mr. Rief?) could not know he was in trouble was beyond me. I remember so well because I was talking to him, asking how the sortie went, when Commander Ernst came in fuming mad and still had the oxygen mask marks on his face.

Now you know the type of person who rises to Skipper in a Fighter Squadron.

They are NOT shy about expressing their feelings to members of their command who are discrepant. So there is no misunderstanding or appearance of ambivalence.

He started with such a snarl that the whole room froze and everybody standing came to attention. I thought he was looking at me, surely didn't think he was talking to Mr. Rief like that. (and it wasn't even loud! And no real profanity!) Even my shopmates thought it was me at first.

Until the Skipper finished with, "And when I order you to break right youngster, you better *gosh darn* break right!"

Then he realized that even Mr. Rief thought he was yelling at me.

It got frosty.

Skipper told me as calm as he could, "As you were." And then told Mr. Rief, "C'mere!"

And they went into another room. My Senior Chief sidled up to me and asked me if I needed new shorts.

HenrikOlsen
2010-Feb-26, 04:47 AM
Was he the guy you mentioned who taught the rest how to consistently beat army and air force pilots by knowing which maneuvers they weren't allowed to perform in peacetime exercises?

pzkpfw
2010-Feb-26, 04:59 AM
Didn't some V1's get put of of control by planes that flew their wingtips over the V1 wing tips? (i.e. interceptors that'd run out of ammo but still had to destroy the thing).

The interceptors wing interrupted the air-flow over the V1's wing, made it bank too far, upset it's guidance.. down it went.


(I'm not suggesting that's what the F-14's were doing to the Bears, just seemed relevant.)

slang
2010-Feb-26, 08:52 AM
Didn't some V1's get put of of control by planes that flew their wingtips over the V1 wing tips? (i.e. interceptors that'd run out of ammo but still had to destroy the thing).

Yes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V-1_flying_bomb#Interceptors), except I don't think it had anything to do with lack of ammo. Good thing you caught that edit (which nobody saw! :P).

mugaliens
2010-Feb-26, 09:31 AM
Now you know the type of person who rises to Skipper in a Fighter Squadron.

I know the type well, and there's a reason they're chosen for their ability to know the difference between when it's best to fully adhere to regulations and when it's not. Unfortunately none of us are perfect, and those doing the choosing sometimes choose commanders who should be commanding. All officers are expected to color outside the lines on occasion - we'd just dang well be right when we did.


...and it wasn't even loud! And no real profanity!

Not required, not even for effect. Just a personal venting, at best.


Skipper told me as calm as he could, "As you were." And then told Mr. Rief, "C'mere!"

And they went into another room. My Senior Chief sidled up to me and asked me if I needed new shorts.

Did you? :)

Jens
2010-Feb-26, 09:36 AM
That probably isnt jargon, but literal.

I may be wrong, but I think it is jargon, because I did a search with "placarded against" and the first two pages were entirely aviation-related hits. And my big Webster's dictionary does not list that meaning of "placard." It does have the example "the protesters placarded the square" meaning "to fill with placards." I'm not sure but it may be that "jargon" sometimes has a negative connotation. I didn't mean it that way, but just to mean "special usage."

Larry Jacks
2010-Feb-26, 02:18 PM
Originally Posted by pzkpfw
Didn't some V1's get put of of control by planes that flew their wingtips over the V1 wing tips? (i.e. interceptors that'd run out of ammo but still had to destroy the thing).

Yes, except I don't think it had anything to do with lack of ammo. Good thing you caught that edit (which nobody saw! :P).

In some ways, it was a safer tactic than shooting at a device filled with explosives. I've seen some gun camera footage that showed what happened when the fighter was close (but not too close) to the V1 when it exploded. You can mess up a plane's paint job (and the pilot's shorts) that way.

korjik
2010-Feb-26, 05:12 PM
I may be wrong, but I think it is jargon, because I did a search with "placarded against" and the first two pages were entirely aviation-related hits. And my big Webster's dictionary does not list that meaning of "placard." It does have the example "the protesters placarded the square" meaning "to fill with placards." I'm not sure but it may be that "jargon" sometimes has a negative connotation. I didn't mean it that way, but just to mean "special usage."

Actually, I was going off of my experience with the US army putting signs up everywhere for every reason. That is why the prior service people all understood what 'placarded against' meant.

BigDon
2010-Feb-26, 07:45 PM
Actually, I was going off of my experience with the US army putting signs up everywhere for every reason..

Everything from "This page is blank." to "This side towards enemy!" plus the classic, "Do not eat!". That one amused sailors no end. We thought it was a rule the Army had about books.

Henrik, I was just replying when company came over that stayed until after my bed time. Sorry.

Yes, he started that when he was XO. (Executive officer, second in command.)

And really pushed to employ the Tomcats strengths. (I got to watch from the TACTs trailer!) One tactic in four on four combat, developed over months on the range and at sea was to close until a set range was reached, (20 nm?), just inside direct aquisition by the zoomies onboard radars, kill their *own* radars to hide, reverse course and accelerate away.

The Zoomies would get all "Woo hoo!" and give pursuit. The Tomcats would get 30 nm of seperation between them and their pursuit, out of visual and the F-15's radar range, (at the time) then the two on the left would break left and the two on the right would break right and they would do wide thirty mile turns at high speed.

The Zoomies of course, not seeing this, would continue their pursuit and then be horribly surprised when the Tomcats turned their radars back on, 10 miles out and off their port and starboard quarters. (Their biggest radar cross section). Then came the swarm of sparrows and 'winders. It was beautiful to watch.

And even you Airforce guys have to acknowledge that that is a good trick to pull. I never saw them come up with a good counter to that in my enlistment.

Mugs, Nooo, I always had good bladder control, even in terrifying circumstance. Though a time or two I was surprised I didn't wet myself.

Terrifying circumstance involving an SH-3 with transmission failure spinning out of control under it's main rotor. I was on the (empty) deck underneath it.

(And I was NOT frozen in place! I was waiting to see which direction *it* was going to fall so I could run the other way, all the time thinking of potential schrapnel patterns and burning fuel. Another long story.)

vonmazur
2010-Feb-26, 08:36 PM
Do US Warrant Officers hold a 'Warrant' or is it just a title? IN the British Forces they hold a Warrant from the Queen.


Captain S: In the US Military, the Warrant is signed by the Cabinet Secretary of the Service involved, ie: mine says "Secretary of the Army, Stanley R. Reasor" Comissions are signed by the President of the US. Once, at a news conference, Ronald Reagan said; "As on old Cavaryman...." All the reporters ran for the phones, foaming at the mouth, to call the Editors and "Stop the Presses" etc....Ron Nissen, Reagan's Press Flak, produced a copy of Ronnie's Commission in the US Army, from the 1930's, signed by FDR, which stated "....Does Commission him a Second Lieutenant of Cavalry..." Needless to say, I thought it was funny....All those worked up reporters, who said things like "This proves Reagan is senile, we haven't had Cavalry for years..." Actually the US 2nd Cavalry Division was dismounted and sent to North Africa as replacements in 1942, and the 1st Cavalry Division was dismounted and sent to the Pacific in 1944. Ronald was transferred to the Air Corps in 1939, like a lot of Cavalry officers and NCO's....

Dale in AL, (Veteran of the 3rd Squardron 4th Regiment of Dragoons, or as we called it "The three-quarter Cav..." This was the Air Cavalry...

SolusLupus
2010-Feb-26, 08:39 PM
The same with "don't do this or I'll kill you" situations as well.

Saw an "international" sign once in Korea. On a road leading to some facility with manned towers. Showed two "Mr. Bathroom guys" in green, one with a helmet and rounded off rifle with a series of straight lines from the barrel to the other guy, who was falling over backwards clutching his chest.

I passed on the closer look option.

Yeah, they would do this instead of relying on lettering because of the number of Western tourists (or tourists from Japan or whatever else) that wouldn't speak or read the local Korean.

BigDon
2010-Feb-26, 09:57 PM
Yeah, they would do this instead of relying on lettering because of the number of Western tourists (or tourists from Japan or whatever else) that wouldn't speak or read the local Korean.

Definately got the point across to even the less than sober.

Dude, you didn't even want to stand there too long looking at the sign once the message sunk in.

I was about fifty feet futher on down the road and I stopped to watch other people looking at the sign, give an almost comic startled jump, then hurry on their way.

Like I did.

SolusLupus
2010-Feb-26, 10:08 PM
It gets better. Along the DMZ, they're setting up sentry turrets. They also have a very feminine voice when telling you to go back or you will be shot up to bits.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung_SGR-A1


In 2006, Samsung Techwin announced a $200,000, all weather, 5.56 mm robotic machine gun to guard the Korean DMZ. It is capable of tracking multiple moving targets using IR and visible light cameras, and is under the control of a human operator. The Intelligent Surveillance and Guard Robot can "identify and shoot a target automatically from over two miles away." The robot, which was developed by a South Korean university, uses "twin optical and infrared sensors to identify targets from 2.5 miles in daylight and around half that distance at night."
It is also equipped with communication equipment (a microphone and speakers), "so that passwords can be exchanged with human troops." If the person gives the wrong password, the robot can "sound an alarm or fire at the target using rubber bullets or a swivel-mounted K-3 machine gun." South Korea's soldiers in Iraq are "currently using robot sentries to guard home bases."[3]

So not fully automated, but still. :)

Larry Jacks
2010-Feb-26, 11:29 PM
Sounds interesting except for the 5.56 mm part. I'd use 7.62 mm at a minimum. My real preference is a good old Ma Deuce (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M2_Browning_machine_gun) or a minigun (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minigun). If it's good enough to kill, it's good enough to overkill.

BigDon
2010-Feb-26, 11:41 PM
Sounds interesting except for the 5.56 mm part. I'd use 7.62 mm at a minimum. My real preference is a good old Ma Deuce (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M2_Browning_machine_gun) or a minigun (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minigun). If it's good enough to kill, it's good enough to overkill.

Or even those new 40 mm grenades the Corp loves so much.

My Dad always taught that one. "If you have to shoot a man once, shoot him twice."

SolusLupus
2010-Feb-26, 11:59 PM
Sounds interesting except for the 5.56 mm part. I'd use 7.62 mm at a minimum. My real preference is a good old Ma Deuce (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M2_Browning_machine_gun) or a minigun (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minigun). If it's good enough to kill, it's good enough to overkill.

5.56 mm is becoming more and more adopted worldwide as a round, from what I understand.

I believe that part of the reasoning why, is because an injured man requires more care than a dead man.

As far as semi-autonomous vehicles go, though, I've developed a military man-crush on the Gladiator (http://c0378172.cdn.cloudfiles.rackspacecloud.com/4484_28080584646.jpg).

GeorgeLeRoyTirebiter
2010-Feb-27, 12:14 AM
They also have a very feminine voice when telling you to go back or you will be shot up to bits.

I almost choked on my coffee when I read this, because I couldn't help but imagine them saying things like "I don't hate you" if you break them.

BigDon
2010-Feb-27, 12:20 AM
Grant mentioned hypoxia in another thread just now and I almost posted this there, but then thought it fit better here.

I recall once a fighter pilot caused some consternation when he called the tower on approached and after being asked how his flight went said, "Uh tower, I think my rabbit is hypoxic. It's jumping all around the cockpit and acting funny."

This caused some concern in the tower and they rolled the crash team who greeted him at the end of the run way.

Where, of course, the rabbit was found out to be real. (And hypoxic) An Easter present for his girlfriend. Hope she liked it. It almost cost him his wings. It was months before he was returned to flight status. And he had a new call sign. (Alice)

I remember we used to pull the electronic warfare gear out of the bird, not needed over the United States, and when we did an airshows in New England, the crews would come back with (boxed) live lobsters stuffed in the space. (Didn't take a Tomcat very long to go from coast to coast in the military corridor. Less than two hours)


Good God Sol, when did we start making those? And when do we get the Dinochrome Brigade? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolo_(tank)

SolusLupus
2010-Feb-27, 12:27 AM
Possibly about the same time as we get the Ogre (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ogre_(game)). :D

The Gladiators were planned to be deployed in 2007.

The next in the line of unmanned vehicles is the Black Knight (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Knight_(Unmanned_Combat_Vehicle))

http://www.baesystems.com/ProductsServices/l_and_a_gs_black_knight.html

BigDon
2010-Feb-27, 12:54 AM
Possibly about the same time as we get the Ogre (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ogre_(game)). :D

The Gladiators were planned to be deployed in 2007.

The next in the line of unmanned vehicles is the Black Knight (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Knight_(Unmanned_Combat_Vehicle))

http://www.baesystems.com/ProductsServices/l_and_a_gs_black_knight.html

I will have you know my young friend, that I was one of the first people on the West Coast to put Orge on advanced order. Still have it in my Mother's garage, I think. Plus all the suppliments up until I enlisted in '79.

The Combine Vs. The PanEuropean cybertanks. Always a good fight.

Thanks for the link. It brought back an absolute buttload of memories.

Same company (Steve Jackson Games) also put out Car Wars and Hymenoptera, two others I recall being worthwhile games. Car Wars being fairly self explainitory and Hymenoptera was about warface between hives of non-industrial intelligent semi reptilian eusocial insectiods. (?!?!)

Food equals troops. And even the fallen counted as food. Just had to keep the workers alive long enough to bring it back.

SolusLupus
2010-Feb-27, 12:56 AM
I will have you know my young friend, that I was one of the first people on the West Coast to put Orge on advanced order. Still have it in my Mother's garage, I think. Plus all the suppliments up until I enlisted in '79.

The Combine Vs. The PanEuropean cybertanks. Always a good fight.

Thanks for the link. It brought back an absolute buttload of memories.

Same company (Steve Jackson Games) also put out Car Wars and Hymenoptera, two others I recall being worthwhile games. Car Wars being fairly self explainitory and Hymenoptera was about warface between hives of non-industrial intelligent semi reptilian eusocial insectiods. (?!?!)

Food equals troops. And even the fallen counted as food. Just had to keep the workers alive long enough to bring it back.

I'm a fan of GURPS, myself, which is also made by Steve Jackson Games. I haven't gotten into In Nomine, but that looks neat too.

Larry Jacks
2010-Feb-27, 01:27 AM
I remember we used to pull the electronic warfare gear out of the bird, not needed over the United States, and when we did an airshows in New England, the crews would come back with (boxed) live lobsters stuffed in the space.

Twenty years ago when I was stationed at Shemya, AK, we got a new Director of Operations (DO) who was an F-15 pilot. He told me of another pilot he knew who was carrying a styrofoam ice chest full of shrimp and ice in the equipment bay behind the pilot's seat in an early F-15A model. Someone decided to bounce him so they joined in a dogfight. The ice chest ruptured and the shrimp got all over the place. Apparently, the ground crews had a hard time cleaning up the mess and the stench of the plane was so bad that it had to be grounded. Needless to say, I bet the ground crews just loved this guy.

As a taxpayer, I was properly offended.

When I was stationed at Peterson AFB, CO, I used to routinely cruise the road by the flight line. Being located where it is, Peterson gets a lot of transient traffic. More than once, I saw pilots unloading skis out of the baggage pod. Peterson was one of the closest bases to the ski slopes. Back in the day, whenever the Air Force Academy was having a home football game, the flight line got pretty crowded. This was especially true if the cadets were playing another service academy. Before the current wars and tight budgets, you could watch quite an airshow from my deck (I'm about 2 miles east of the academy football stadium).

As a taxpayer, I was properly offended. As an airplane geek, I enjoyed it.

korjik
2010-Feb-27, 06:26 AM
I will have you know my young friend, that I was one of the first people on the West Coast to put Orge on advanced order. Still have it in my Mother's garage, I think. Plus all the suppliments up until I enlisted in '79.

The Combine Vs. The PanEuropean cybertanks. Always a good fight.

Thanks for the link. It brought back an absolute buttload of memories.

Same company (Steve Jackson Games) also put out Car Wars and Hymenoptera, two others I recall being worthwhile games. Car Wars being fairly self explainitory and Hymenoptera was about warface between hives of non-industrial intelligent semi reptilian eusocial insectiods. (?!?!)

Food equals troops. And even the fallen counted as food. Just had to keep the workers alive long enough to bring it back.

I did some Ogre before I got into Battletech. Not as much tossing of nukes, but who can go wrong with 30 foot tall particle cannon armed giant robots dropping from orbit.

HenrikOlsen
2010-Feb-27, 08:53 AM
Sounds interesting except for the 5.56 mm part. I'd use 7.62 mm at a minimum. My real preference is a good old Ma Deuce (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M2_Browning_machine_gun) or a minigun (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minigun). If it's good enough to kill, it's good enough to overkill.
Rule 37 (http://store.schlockmercenary.com/PhotoGallery.asp?ProductCode=P-R37)

captain swoop
2010-Feb-27, 12:49 PM
My Cousin used to sit in the back seat of a Buccaneer. It had a rotating Bomb Bay, When they flew down to Akrotiri on Cyprus for exercises they always came back with a bay full of booze. Maritime Strike Aircraft don't go through Customs it seems.

slang
2010-Feb-27, 09:32 PM
Maritime Strike Aircraft don't go through Customs it seems.

There are ways to make Customs ready and waiting on the wrong airfield. And a quick ground crew can have a travel pod gone pretty quickly.

Tobin Dax
2010-Feb-27, 11:38 PM
. . . until a set range was reached, (20 nm?), . . . .

. . . 30 nm of seperation . . . .
I am definitely an astronomer. It's a good thing that I learned that nm stands for nautical miles from a student about six months ago. This still took a second look, since 20 nanometer is pretty darn close.

mugaliens
2010-Feb-28, 08:06 AM
Captain S: In the US Military, the Warrant is signed by the Cabinet Secretary of the Service involved, ie: mine says "Secretary of the Army, Stanley R. Reasor" Comissions are signed by the President of the US.

Yes - initial appointments are by the service secretary, but further levels are commissions from the President. More, here (http://usawocc.army.mil/whatiswo.htm), from the U.S. Army Warrant School website:


Candidates who successfully complete Warrant Officer Candidate School are appointed in the grade of Warrant Officer One. When promoted to Chief Warrant Officer Two, warrant officers are commissioned by the President and have the same legal status as their traditional commissioned officer counterparts.

Graybeard6
2010-Feb-28, 08:09 AM
(snip)(Didn't take a Tomcat very long to go from coast to coast in the military corridor. Less than two hours)(snip)

I guess there were different rules governing airspeed when you were on active duty. Nowadays, and for quite a few years, military aircraft are forbidden from exceeding Mach 1 in US airspace.
However, there are workarounds. In 1997 GB Jrs. squadron was practicing bombing in Arizona. His exec's Annapolis roomie was flying the space shuttle, so he had a VIP invitation for the launch. This also gave Jr. an excuse to visit his parents. He called me at work just before takeoff with his arrival time. When I asked his route, he said "Yuma to Dallas for fuel, Corpus Christi, for fuel, Key West for fuel, Patrick AFB at 2100, pick me up." When I asked why he was flying all the way south to Key West, the answer was "Dad, there's no speed limit over the Gulf!"
My office mate, a retired submarine Master Chief, was listening in, and said "Ain't you glad we left the military in such good hands?"

mugaliens
2010-Mar-01, 09:57 AM
Now that puts smiles on my face, Graybeard6. :)

Jens
2010-Mar-01, 10:27 AM
I guess there were different rules governing airspeed when you were on active duty. Nowadays, and for quite a few years, military aircraft are forbidden from exceeding Mach 1 in US airspace.


When you say "US airspace," do you mean only US airspace and not that of other countries. What about in countries like Germany and Japan and South Korea that have US bases? Are they allowed to fly above mach 1? Not talking about a combat situation of course.

Nicolas
2010-Mar-01, 12:58 PM
At least in Belgium and the Netherlands it's not allowed, and I think neither in Germany.

Nice view at air shows: jets getting oh so close but just not above the sound barrier. :)

korjik
2010-Mar-01, 08:46 PM
When you say "US airspace," do you mean only US airspace and not that of other countries. What about in countries like Germany and Japan and South Korea that have US bases? Are they allowed to fly above mach 1? Not talking about a combat situation of course.

Other countries control their own airspace.

slang
2010-Mar-01, 10:14 PM
At least in Belgium and the Netherlands it's not allowed, and I think neither in Germany.

Not over land, anyway. There are designated areas over the North Sea where supersonic flight is allowed, quite a bit away from the coast line.

mugaliens
2010-Mar-01, 10:30 PM
At least in Belgium and the Netherlands it's not allowed, and I think neither in Germany.

Your thinking is sound. :) In fact, we can't fly after 10pm without a waiver!