Tag:

aircraft

The flight engineer stations on the B-36 and Concorde both included several dials, switches, and buttons. However, only the Peacemaker had levers

by Till Daisd July 27, 2023

In the past, a flight engineer’s position was used in the design and construction of the majority of bigger aircraft, both military and civil

A flight engineer (FE), commonly referred to as an air engineer, is a member of the flight crew who controls and maintains an aircraft’s sophisticated systems. The position was occasionally referred to as the “air mechanic” in the early days of aviation. There are still some larger fixed-wing airplanes and helicopters that employ flight engineers. On certain spacecraft, there is a corresponding crew position. The position of flight engineer has been eliminated in most modern airplanes due to the sophisticated systems’ reliance on electronic microprocessors and computers for both monitoring and adjustment.

In the past, a flight engineer’s position was used in the design and construction of the majority of bigger aircraft, both military and civilian. Look at the FE station on the Concorde supersonic jet in the picture below.

Concorde-FE-Station — Concorde’s FE station

Why did the Concorde flight engineer have so many buttons, dials, and switches?

‘Define “so many”. Consider the FE station for the Convair B-36,’ Charles Grimes, former Pilot, Instructor, and Fleet Captain at Midway Airlines (2000-2001), says on Quora.

‘Although the Concorde was no picnic.

‘The answer in both cases is the FE’s job was to monitor and control the aircraft systems—all of them. Everything was there to allow the FE to “see” how the systems were configured, what the status was at any given time, make changes to system operations, and run normal and emergency checklists as required.

‘By the time of the Concorde, turbine aircraft no longer required the FE station to include thrust control levers, only the pilot’s station had power levers. In the[B-36 FE’s station] photo above you can see a bank of levers. The pilots were happy to let the FE set power which required setting throttle, propellors (manifold pressure), and mixture (correct adjustment of air/fuel mixture impacts fuel burn and cylinder head temperature) and tinkering with the settings to synchronize the propellers to reduce vibration/noise.’

‘Concorde was the 60s/70s product, but it was decades ahead of its time upon launch,’ James Kirk, an aviation expert, says on Quora.

‘Concorde did use digital computers for the air intake ramp system for the engines. They needed a way to control the amount of air going into the engine, but doing it manually was not going to be possible, so they had to create a computer to control the intake.’

Ian Thompson, another aviation expert, says on Quora;

‘Funny story on a Concorde’s last flight it was a tradition that the flight engineer inserted his hat in a gap to the right of the console. As the plane cooled down the hat became permanently jammed in position.’

Photo by U.S. Air Force and Unknown

July 27, 2023 0 comment

History

2 North Vietnamese MiG-17 pilots bombed the first US Navy ships damaged by airstrikes since the end of WWII

by Till Daisd July 26, 2023

written by Till Daisd

On April 19, 1972, the threat of an enemy aerial attack on US Navy ships off the coast of North Vietnam really materialized

US Navy ships operating off the coast of North Vietnam became actively engaged in the air war as combat operations heated up in the spring of 1972.

The Tonkin Gulf Yacht Club by Thomas McKelvey Cleaver claims that on April 19, 1972, the threat of an enemy aerial strike on Navy ships off the coast of North Vietnam actually materialized. As part of Operation Sea Dragon fire mission against transportation targets on Highway One ashore, USS Higbee (DD-806) was five miles off the coast near Dong Hoi with USS Lloyd Thomas (DD 764), USS Sterett (DLG-31), and the Commander of the Seventh Fleet (Com7thFlt) flagship USS Oklahoma City (CLG-5), when radar detected two bogeys emerging from the mountains and flying low over the gulf waters.

When the Higbee was attacked by a special force that the Vietnam People’s Air Force (VPAF) had established the year prior to participating in shipping strikes, the crew of the ship had no idea that they were about to become the first US Navy ship bombed by an enemy air force since 1945. North Vietnamese leaders realized that the Seventh Fleet would probably reactivate Sea Dragon, in which surface ships had shelled the North Vietnamese coast throughout the years of Rolling Thunder, and they instructed the VPAF to build a strike force that could counter these operations when preparations for the 1972 offensive began.

A military advisor known as “Ernesto” from the Cuban Air Force, a specialist in anti-shipping attack, had selected and trained ten pilots of the MiG-17-equipped 923rd Fighter Regiment in anti-shipping maneuvers in preparation for an invasion of the island nation by the United States following the failure of the Bay of Pigs invasion.

Nguyen Van Bay, a MiG-17 pilot, and ace, served as the special force’s commander. Six pilots were deemed capable of carrying out maritime attack missions by March 1972. The 28th Technical Brigade built a special hidden airfield at Gat in Quang Binh Province that was expertly camouflaged to avoid being discovered by US photo reconnaissance missions. Some MiG-17s were modified so they could deploy a 250-kilogram (550-pound) bomb under each wing instead of the fighters’ usual underwing drop tanks. In front of the port of Nhat Le, the 403rd Radar Unit established its position close to the Dinh River, where it monitored US warships off the coast.

USS-Higbee — The U.S. Navy destoryer USS Higbee (DD-806) at sea.

In order to throw off US radar surveillance, VPAF pilots Le Hong Diep and Tu De flew two of the special attack aircraft to Gia Lam and then Vinh before bringing them to the secret airfield at Gat the day before the scheduled attack. Tu De recalled then: “We flew just above the ground after taking off from Vinh, to stay below the enemy radar.” That night, the 403rd Radar Unit picked up four US ships off the coast of Quang Binh Province as they took up station five to seven miles to sea from the villages of Quang Xa and Ly Nhan Nam.

Later, Nguyen Van Bay recalled the attack:

“Le Xuan Di and I were preparing for the attack. At 0930 hours, the 403rd radar unit reported four ships 40 kilometers [25 miles] from Le Thuy and 120 kilometers [75 miles] from Dinh, and three ships 80 kilometers [50 miles] from the Sot River. However, due to the foggy weather, we could not take off. At noon the radar unit reported the ships had moved to the south and only two remained in position. By 1500 hours the first group of four ships was 15 kilometers [nine-and-a-half miles] from Ly Hoa and the second two-ship formation was seven kilometers [two-and-a-half miles] from Quang Trach, while three more warships were 18 kilometers [11 miles] from Ly Hoa. At 1600 hours, a new group of ships was spotted 16 kilometers [nearly four miles] from Nhat Le.

“At 1605 hrs we received our orders to take off. When we were over Ly Hoa, we saw the ships and noted puffs of smoke, that they were firing on the shore. We received the order to attack.”

Le Xuan Di made a left turn toward the fleet, flying over the other ships as he targeted Higbee and picked up speed. The crew of the destroyer had just evacuated to the fantail after one of the two 5-inch guns in her aft mount fired a “hot round,” when a MiG-17 came low overhead and dropped two bombs on the ship before breaking to the left. His bombs both impacted the destroyer:

MiG-17-US-Navy-Ships — A preserved Vietnamese MiG-17. It was used in the “Air Battle of Dong Hoi” on Apr. 19, 1972. Pilot Nguyen Van Bay B flew this aircraft and bombed the U.S. Navy destroyer USS Higbee (DD-806).

“While Le Xuan Di was attacking his target I flew on, and upon reaching the Dinh River I spotted two ships to the northeast. I was too close and did not have time for a proper attack, so I overshot them. I had to return for a second pass. Le Xuan Di asked me on the radio: “All right?” I answered “Not really,” since I thought I had missed my target. After returning to base at 1622 hrs, I was told that a 30 meter [99-foot]-high column of smoke was seen out at sea, and later something burst into flames.”

Le Xuan Di severely damaged Higbee’s superstructure and completely destroyed the aft 5-inch mount while injuring four crew members with his two bombs. The attackers were only over the task force for 17 minutes. The fact that Oklahoma City barely suffered modest damage supports Nguyen Van Bay’s critique of his performance. Sterett allegedly used two Terrier missiles to bring down Bay’s MiG after getting a radar lock on it, but Bay was able to land at Gat airfield. Also, the task force claimed to have engaged in a firefight with two North Vietnamese torpedo boats, however, the North Vietnamese ultimately denied sending any of their ships to take part in the incident.

The airfields at Dong Hoi and Vinh were attacked the following day in response. A 30-aircraft Alpha strike was launched a few days later in an attempt to take down the secret airfield at Gat. Despite a damaged rudder, Higbee was still able to sail on her own to Da Nang, where she anchored next to the USS Hector (AR-7). Don Davis, an AP war journalist who had recently completed a mission aboard the similarly-tied-to-Hector USS Buchanan (DDG-14), boarded Higbee. Davis later recalled that the ship’s fantail “looked like a junkyard floating in a pool of dirty oil.”

The photograph Davis took of the damage would be widely published in US newspapers. The local naval authorities weren’t happy that a reporter was there, he recalled as well. The incident was briefly described in the official history of the USS Higbee in the Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships (DANFS) as late as 2017, however as of 2019, both the DANFS record and the Naval History and Heritage Command (NHHC) record for the ship contain no reference of the incident. NHHC responded that there was no “official record” of such an event when questioned. Aerial Battles in the Skies of Vietnam, the official history of the VPAF, contains a detailed account of the raid.

The Tonkin Gulf Yacht Club is published by Osprey Publishing and is available to order here.

Photo by Bình Giang via Wikipedia, U.S. Air Force and U.S. Navy

US-Navy-destroyer-USS-Higbee — USS Higbee under repair following her bomb hit.

July 26, 2023 0 comment

History

Jimmy Abbotts, a Canadian pilot in WWII, bailed out of his damaged Spitfire, and his parachute was stuck on the radio mast

by Till Daisd July 25, 2023

written by Till Daisd

It was not uncommon for airmen to strike or become hooked on their aircraft during the Second World War

It was not uncommon for airmen to strike or become hooked on their aircraft during the Second World War. It’s possible that H. J. Marseilles, a Luftwaffe “expert,” struck his aircraft’s tailplane or fin and died or was rendered unconscious. In any case, he was killed because he failed to deploy his parachute.

‘There is a remarkable story of Pilot Officer J.E. Abbotts, a Canadian who had an almost unbelievably lucky escape,’ Steven Rusling, an aviation expert, says on Quora.

Abbotts would later recollect reading a piece by Stephen M. Fochuk that appeared on the Vintage Wings of Canada website, as Rusling recounts.

‘My Squadron was 403 but I was flying No. 3 with 421 Sqn (short of pilots). After checking the Forts out North of Amsterdam, we were sweeping up and down at 30,000 feet.

‘I spotted 2 – ME 109s below. Winco ‘Johnny’ Johnson told me to keep an eye on them; finally, he said ‘Go after them’. I rolled out of the formation and was just coming up nicely through the odd puff of flak when something hit me; lots of oil and smoke. I fired anyway but was out of range.

‘I started towards the North Sea but the engine quit, and a 109 was rolling over above to attack – I spun away to about 4,000 or 5,000 feet and decided to bale out. I rolled over and came out but hit the fuselage and was knocked out. When I regained consciousness, the shoulder strap of my parachute was around the aerial mast. I was hanging on the right-hand side of the a/c, the a/c was right side up, wings level and in a nice glide. I held on with one hand and tried to tear the chute out, but I was getting too close to the ground. I decided that it was all over. And thought ‘I’ve had it’. I passed out. I woke up 3 hours later safe in the arms of – Germans.’

So how did he survive? His Spitfire made an autonomous landing. We are aware of what happened thanks to Mr. Albert Phillipps, a Dutch witness who wrote to the Canadian Department of National Defence for Air in London and whose witness is posted on the Vintage Wings of Canada website.

‘Dear Sir: Herewith I let you know that I would be very pleased to come into conversation with a Canadian pilot who landed on one of our bulb fields in Hillegom, Holland on the 29th of July, 1943 […]

‘Suddenly however a plane came down circling around with its engine heavily smoking. We noticed at once when it came out of the damp that it was a British fighter. The lower it came the more scared we got because we didn’t know where it should come down, because of its circling around. You should have seen the workers in the fields, they were also running a circle. When the plane came lower we saw the pilot was hanging beside the plane near the tail. His parachute was hooked on the little radio mast, behind the aviator’s seat. He was a lucky fellow, because the plane came on the ground all by itself with not too much speed, after flying over the roof of a little house with it missing by a few inches. The aviator was dirty and black from sand and mud and injured not severely. I asked what he was, and he said a ‘Canadian’. Then I had to shut my dirty mouth, so as the German soldiers said to me, which showed up by that time.’

You can tell how lucky Abbott was when you look at the condition of his Spitfire.

Photo by Vintage Wings of Canada and rcaf403squadron

July 25, 2023 0 comment

History

Why the Space Shuttle smelled quite bad when ground crews got aboard after a flight

by Till Daisd July 24, 2023

written by Till Daisd

Is it accurate to say that the Space Shuttle smelt awful when ground crews arrived to clean and unload it after a flight?

During the 30 years of the Space Shuttle Program, NASA’s shuttle fleet accomplished numerous firsts and allowed more people to travel into space than ever before.

On April 12, 1981, Columbia roared off Launch Pad 39A at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida to start the space shuttle’s mission career. The space shuttle is now known formally as the Space Transportation System (STS). In July 2011, STS-135—the last space mission—was carried out by Atlantis.

Around 2 1/2 million moving parts make up this special vehicle system, according to NASA’s PDF Space Shuttle Era Facts.

The sole component of the shuttle “stack” that travels into orbit is the orbiter vehicle (OV), also known as the space shuttle and made up of the twin solid rocket boosters (SRBs), enormous external fuel tank (ET), and three space shuttle main engines (SSMEs). The boosters are launched into the Atlantic Ocean, caught, and then employed again. The only component of the stack that is not used again is the external tank. Instead, around nine minutes after launch, it re-enters the atmosphere and burns up over the Pacific Ocean. Unlike NASA’s Apollo capsules that came before it, the shuttle does not need parachutes to land when it returns to Earth. Instead, it returns by floating back to a runway on Earth on a set of wings.

But is it true to say that the Space Shuttle smelt really awful when ground employees entered it to clean and unload after a flight?

‘The answer to this question is a ‘YES!’ in all capital letters!’ Explains Dave Mohr, a NASA contractor, on Quora.

‘After landing, the operating capacity of the Environmental Control System was somewhat reduced by virtue of the vehicle no longer being in a vacuum. This reduced the effectiveness of the conditioning (and odor removal) of the cabin air.

‘All ‘fresh food’ and ‘wet trash’ stored in the vehicle (as well as other things) began to get pretty rank after a while.

‘In the cases that I am aware of the vehicle was completely powered down somewhere between 45 min and 1 hour after landing, due to exhaustion of the onboard coolant working fluid (ammonia). [The environmental system was run until ammonia was depleted. It did not interfere with the ability to detect hydrazine, as this detection was done by inserting a probe up into the throat of each thruster. The ammonia boiler would not have interfered with that. Having said that, the vehicle only had something like 1/2 hour of Ammonia remaining after coming to a stop on a typical landing.]’

Mohr concludes;

‘The stagnant air in the crew module was in really bad shape before very long.’

Photo by Carla Thomas, NASA

July 24, 2023 0 comment

History

Israeli pilots went to TOPGUN and taught instructors tactics for F-4 versus MiG-21

by Till Daisd July 23, 2023

written by Till Daisd

After the 1973 Yom Kippur War, the Israelis dispatched an F-4 crew to TOPGUN

New tactics are acquired in battle, lost or discarded when conflict is over, and relearned at great expense during the following conflict. This is a recurring theme in the history of air combat. When America was sucked into the Vietnam War, this pattern continued into the 1960s. Despite having an advantage in training and equipment, US Navy aircrews were struggling to defeat North Vietnamese fighters. Lessons in air combat from earlier conflicts that had been forgotten or thought to be irrelevant due to technological advancements were once more useful.

The Navy’s Fighter Weapons School, TOPGUN, was founded in 1968 to train others in these tactics, teach Navy aircrews the fundamentals of air combat, and make sure that naval aviation “never again” forgot its lessons.

Although foreign aircrew from a number of nations, primarily Israel, Australia, Germany, and Canada, attended TOPGUN’s ground school and some, including the Germans and Israelis in 1975, actually flew against the TOPGUN instructors, very few foreign students attended the TOPGUN class, according to Brad Elward in his book TOPGUN: The Legacy: The Complete History of TOPGUN and Its Impact on Tactical Aviation.

After the 1973 Yom Kippur War, according to Dan “Bad Bob” McCort, an F-4 pilot who worked there from 1977 to 1980, the Israelis sent a crew to TOPGUN. “We had them come through as a crew in a class so that they would have interaction with the staff and the students because of their experiences and their employment of the F-4 specifically against a MiG-21, the high threat at the time,” McCort said. “I remember going out one on one against Zev Rahz in an F-4—I was in an F-5 for that mission—and watching him employ it in a way that I’ve never seen an F-4 employed. I mean, that was a no-kidding eye-opening; this is what we call a pivotal moment here.”

According to McCort, the encounter with the Israelis altered the way TOPGUN instructed pilots on the MiG-21. “We had this concept of how to employ the airplanes based on some of the results of the Have programs, and that’s what we were teaching.” McCort added, “A lot of these tactics had been, in concept, understood, but these guys having done it day in, day out (because we hadn’t got to that point yet), really clearly got it!” McCort went on: “For example, Zev was the one that showed us how to turn into a MiG-21, maintain knots, and drag the guy down in altitude to the point where his thrust-to-weight advantage and his energy addition rate and his lack of bleed would make the difference.”‘ McCort said that as he and Zev met and passed, “I was used to seeing an F-4 either try for a two-circle turn or go into a vertical move to try to get something to happen. Zev basically tried to drive it one circle, and he just dove down deep. It was a really big surprise. That was a tactic that we jumped on and refined to exploit the energy addition for the Phantom and the bleed rate in the MiG-21. This was a key component of my 1v1 lecture in the F-4 against what became a Category II airplane.

Mike “Squeeze” Gaskell, an instructor on staff in the late 1970s, vividly recalled the Israelis’ visit to TOPGUN. “I’ve never seen things done with the F-4 that these guys could do with the F-4,” said Gaskell. “They were excellent pilots,” Gaskell said there was one incident in particular that stuck with him. “During one of our debriefs, they really didn’t want to hear a lot about the TOPGUN way of doing a debrief or tactics. They kept asking questions […]. This guy would ask, ‘Now, when you did this, what were you doing?’ And he’s pretty much grilling me. I didn’t understand what it was all about until years later. Those guys were the two pilots who led the strike—Operation Opera or Babylon—against the Iraqi nuclear power plant.” Here, Gaskell was referring to the Israeli’s Jun. 7, 1981 strike. Saddam had a powerful air force at that time, “and they wanted to know more [about Iraqi Air Force air-to-air tactics]. That’s why they were there.”

The Israelis’ presence also helped TOPGUN realize how important it is to train for “one v. many” combat scenarios. Manfred “Fokker” Rietsch, TOPGUN’s first Marine Corps instructor, recalled the Israelis told the staff, “You need to develop tactics for a ‘one versus many.’ ‘How do you fight one versus many?’ So we took their word for it and said, `Okay, fine. We’ll have one versus many tactics.’” Rietsch said it was really an acknowledgment that in a large fight, “You’re not going to have a Sparrow or be two versus two, or two versus one, or one versus whatever. You’re going to have a bunch of airplanes out there. This is where it’s so important to have the internal coordination within your flight on how you sort, who targets who, and if you engage, who’s going to engage what.”‘ The “one v. many” flight was introduced in the mid-1970s under Jim Ruliffson’s command tour but was slow to take start because it demanded “a lot of assets,” said Rietsch.”

Curiously, the USAF also realized the advantages of “one versus many” training at around the same time. Donald L. Gish, then a major on active duty, wrote the following in a 1975 article for the Fighter Weapons School Review: “Other areas in which training and tactics must improve are ‘one vs many’ and ‘gaggle’ type engagements. Viewing the European scenario, we cannot expect to fight with a superior number of aircraft, not when the odds are even.” Gish wrote further, “We must anticipate and train for an element against four or six opponents, or a flight of four against twelve.” Due to their perceived impending conflict on the plains of Europe, where they would be outnumbered by Soviet and Warsaw Pact air forces, both fighter weapons schools started training.

TOPGUN: The Legacy: The Complete History of TOPGUN and Its Impact on Tactical Aviation is available to order here.

Photo by War Thunder Via Pinterest and U.S. Air Force

July 23, 2023 0 comment

History

The legendary Tuskegee Airmen member Brig. Gen. Charles McGee passed away

by Till Daisd July 22, 2023

written by Till Daisd

On January 16, 2022, retired Brig. Gen. Charles McGee, a renowned member of the Tuskegee Airmen, passed away at 102 years old

On January 16, 2022, retired Brig. Gen. Charles McGee, a renowned member of the Tuskegee Airmen, passed away at 102 years old. Throughout his career, McGee completed 409 air combat missions.

He was one of the last surviving pilots from the Tuskegee Airmen — a group of African American pilots who were credited not only for their service in World War II but also for breaking barriers.

McGee was one of just 8 combat-experienced pilots left out of the 355 Tuskegee pilots, according to WTOP News.

McGee, who was born on December 7th, 1919, in Cleveland, excelled as a leader from a young age and attained the rank of outstanding Eagle Scout. He continued to lead throughout his military career after entering the US Army as a pilot on October 26, 1942, according to the article Tuskegee Airman celebrates 102nd birthday at 12th FTW by Lori A. Bultman, 502nd Air Base Wing Public Affairs.

On June 30, 1943, McGee earned his pilot’s wings. He flew his first mission on Valentine’s Day in February 1944 while stationed in Italy with the 301st Fighter Squadron of the 332d Fighter Group.

McGee-Tuskegee — Retired Brig. Gen. Charles McGee, a documented Tuskegee Airman, holds up a bottle of cola to honor the tradition of shooting down an enemy aircraft during his tour of the 99th Flying Training Squadron on Dec. 6, 2021, at Joint Base San Antonio, Texas.

McGee escorted Consolidated B-24 Liberator and Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress bombers over Germany, Austria, and the Balkans while flying the Bell P-39Q Airacobra, Republic P-47D Thunderbolt, and North American P-51 Mustang fighter planes during World War II. McGee had completed 137 combat missions by the time he was elevated to the rank of captain. In December 1944, he traveled back to the US and started working as an instructor for North American B-25 Mitchell bombers at Tuskegee Army Air Field. He remained there until the base’s closure in 1946.

During the war, McGee was transferred to Lockbourne Air Field in Columbus, Ohio, where he took the position of base operation and training officer before being enrolled in an air refueling unit and attending a technical course for aircraft maintenance. McGee flew P-51 Mustangs once more in the 67th Fighter Bomber Squadron at the start of the Korean War, flying 100 missions and rising to the rank of major.

He continued his career as a fighter pilot in the US Air Force, the Department of Defense’s newest aviation division. Then-Lt. Col. McGee flew 172 combat flights in a McDonnell RF-4 photo reconnaissance aircraft during the Vietnam War. This concluded a 30-year active service career in which he participated in 409 combat missions as a fighter.

Since his retirement about 50 years ago, he has been honored with numerous awards, including the Congressional gold medal and inclusion into the National Aviation Hall of Fame by President George W. Bush.

Yet, McGee’s career did not stop with receiving accolades. In fact, according to his family, the last three years of his life were some of the greatest. He flew three state-of-the-art business jets to commemorate his 99th and 100th birthdays. His last journey was made in an Air Force T-37 VIP Air Transport on December 6, 2021, to visit the 99th Flying Training Squadron, 12th Flying Training Wing, at Joint Base San Antonio-Randolph in honor of his 102nd birthday.

During a heritage tour of the 99th Flying Training Squadron, McGee and many members of his family observed a T-1A Jayhawk with his name on the side on the nearby flightline. Three of McGee’s children were among the visitors who later went to a facility with flight simulators and took part in a training mission in a T-1A aircraft simulator.

A model T-7A Red Hawk was given as a gift at the end of the visit, and squadron members serenaded McGee as a cake was placed in front of him. The Tuskegee Airmen and the P-51 Mustang “Red Tail” aircraft that they flew during World War II are remembered in the Air Force’s newest trainer aircraft, the T-7 Red Hawk.

According to a statement from McGee’s family, he was a “living legend known for his kind-hearted, and humble nature, who saw positivity at every turn.”

Photo by U.S. Air Force photo by Sean M. Worrell

July 22, 2023 0 comment

History

The Fleet Air Arm F4Fs that overwhelmed Luftwaffe Bf-109Gs

by Till Daisd July 21, 2023

written by Till Daisd

In the closing stages of the war, some Messerschmitt Bf-109Gs of III Gruppe/JG5 were defeated by Fleet Air Arm Squadron 882 F4F Wildcat fighters

The British Royal Navy was in dire need of a powerful single-seat monoplane fighter at the outbreak of World War II. This requirement was met by the brand-new Grumman F4F-4 Wildcat fighter produced in America.

Martlets in the Battle of the Atlantic and on Arctic Convoys distinguished themselves by providing efficient fighter support from escort carriers and successfully collaborating with Fairey Swordfish to find German U Boats.

Fleet Air Arm Squadron 882 F4F Wildcat(Martlets were renamed Wildcats in 1944 to align with combined US and British operations) fighters even defeated a few Messerschmitt Bf-109Gs of III Gruppe/JG5 in the last days of the war.

‘On 26 March 1945, in a last action, FM-2s from 882 Squadron Lieut Comdr. GAM Flood, RNVR) off ‘Searcher,’ escorting a flight of Avengers along the coast of Norway, was attacked near Christiansand by a flight of eight III Gruppe JG 5 Me-109Gs that may have been the -14 model,’ Pete Feigal, Former Pro Military Artist and Aviation Expert, says on Quora.

‘The Wildcats shot down four of the Bf-109Gs at a cost of one Wildcat damaged. A fifth 109 was claimed as damaged.

‘As near as can be determined from available Luftwaffe loss lists, there were three 109’s lost, werk# 412398 (Fw. Hermann Jaeger), 782139 (Uffz. Gottfried Rösch), and 782270 (Fw. Heinrich Dreisbach). One other 109 crashed, (pilot unknown) on landing, however, the information available does not indicate if the crash was due to pilot error or from battle damage. Damage to this airplane was noted as 25%. Available Luftwaffe credit lists show no claims from this action.

‘One other 109 crashed, (pilot unknown) on landing, however, the information available does not indicate if the crash was due to pilot error or from battle damage. Damage to this airplane was noted as 25%. Available Luftwaffe credits lists show no claims from this action.

‘Capt. Eric Brown wrote about the F4F Wildcats (Martlets) vs the Messerschmitt Bf 109:

“The Wildcat, although faster and more maneuverable than the Sea Hurricane, was still some 60mph slower than the German fighter. The lower the altitude the less the odds favoured the Me109F. The Wildcat also had a heavier punch to deliver. Verdict: As a dogfighter, the Wildcat was superior to the Me 109F, but the initiative always lay with the Germans because of its superior performance. At low altitudes, the Me109F had the edge over the Wildcat, but not by much.”’

Feigal concludes;

‘However, by the time the Wildcat VI was on the scene (1944), his assessment was rather less rosy:

“Wildcat VI Versus Messerschmitt 109G-6: The agile little Wildcat could outmaneuver the latest version of the Me 109, but the performance differential had widened and the German could run rings around the Wildcat. If the Me 109G-6 was tempted to mix it in a dogfight, the Wildcat had a better-than-even chance of success. Verdict: The Wildcat was no real match for the Me 109G-6, but the German could not afford to take liberties with his angry little opponent.”’

Photo by Clemens Vasters from Viersen, Germany, Germany, and Rob Hodgkins via Wikipedia

July 21, 2023 0 comment

Cold War

Despite having wings swept forward, the F-14 is capable of reaching supersonic speeds

by Till Daisd July 20, 2023

written by Till Daisd

The aircraft’s highest speed with its wings swept back was 1,544 mph. So what was the F-14’s top speed when its wings were swept forward?

A fleet defense fighter that could engage high-altitude bombers from well beyond of visual range was necessary due to improvements made during the Cold War in Soviet long-range patrol and bomber aircraft. Grumman’s response was the iconic F-14 Tomcat. With their long-range AIM-54 Phoenix air-to-air missiles, F-14s could fight numerous adversaries from a distance of nearly 90 miles. With this hefty load, an interceptor’s fast speed was required, therefore Grumman created the F-14’s very effective variable-sweep wing, which allows it to fly at a variety of airspeeds.

AIM-7 Sparrow missiles were carried for medium-range combat, while AIM-9 Sidewinders and an M61-A1 20mm gun were available for dogfighting. In the latter role, the F-14 was given a battle maneuvering capability by the Tomcat’s variable-sweep wings that was not possible with a “standard” fixed planform wing.

The aircraft’s highest speed with its wings swept back was 1,544 mph. So what was the F-14’s top speed when its wings were swept forward?

“I guess there is a couple ways to answer this question. How fast is it supposed to go if the wings were stuck forward? Or how fast could it physically go looking at thrust verse drag?”, says Chuck Hunter, ex-F-14 pilot with the US Navy, on Quora.

Despite the Tomcat’s variable-sweep wings being computer controlled the F-14 driver had “the ability to manually position the wings wherever we wanted by pulling up on the emergency wing sweep handle and physically positioning the wings. (the yellow and black covered handle),” Hunter says. “We NEVER did this except to put the wings into oversweep for parking on the carrier (taking the wings from 68 degrees to 72 degrees) The aircraft can’t fly in this position.

“However, if you manually put them at 20 degrees or they were stuck at 20 degrees because of a failure in the CADCn(Central Air Data Computer) or other systems, you would be limited to about 0.5nIndicated Mach Number. You have plenty of thrust to exceed that, but that is what the aircraft was designed to fly, and it would be very comfortable. You can pretty much do anything with the aircraft except go fast.

“On the other side, just from a point of discussion, how fast could you go with the wings stuck at 20 degrees? The wings are not all that draggy and while you would generate strange limit moments with the afterburners lit I see no reason you wouldn’t be able to push it up to the transonic range even straight and level. It would not be comfortable or smart, but it is doable. It is not designed to do it, but the basic physics of thrust verse drag could get you there. Kind of like the J79 engine on the F-4, with big enough engines, you can make anything go fast.

“So that was straight and level, there is also no doubt that if I dropped the nose with burners lit I could get it to go supersonic. Not sure for how long before something ripped off the airplane or the controls stopped working correctly, but we would be supersonic before we died.”

Hunter concludes;

“I have taken the F-14 from ~130kts to 1.2nMach in the blink of an eye when 90 degrees nose down, unloaded, and burners lit. Those wings at 20 degrees would not be a factor in getting there. I only stopped at 1.2 Mach (800kts) because that was the aircraft speed limit at a low altitude.

“So, two answers. What is was designed for ~0.5 Mach, and from a thrust verse drag as fast as you have altitude for or until it stops flying for many reasons.”

Photo by U.S. Navy

July 20, 2023 0 comment

Cold War

When an RF-8 pilot flew through the outskirts of Hanoi performing a super low-level high-speed run

by Till Daisd July 19, 2023

written by Till Daisd

On August 17, 1966, Lt. Andre Coltrin of VFP-63 Det G piloted an RF-8 while performing a very risky photo-reconnaissance mission over Bac Giang on the Thuong River at a height of only 100 feet and a speed of 675 mph

The Vought RF-8 Crusader took on the role of the US Navy’s primary light-photographic platform for the duration of the nine-year conflict throughout the protracted years of the Vietnam War. Between October 1963 and January 1974, 49 carrier landings were made, with 20 RF-8s lost in battle.

On Aug. 17, 1966, Lt Andre Coltrin (who had already seen considerable action with Oriskany’s Det G, VF-111’s Dick Schaffert recalled that as an escort pilot, he had ‘chased Andre across the Thanh Hoa Bridge and uptown Haiphong more times than I care to remember’) of VFP-63 Det G flew an extremely hazardous photo-reconnaissance mission at Bac Giang on the Thuong River at only 100 ft and 675 knots.

Later in the conflict, there would be limits against flying photo missions below 3500 ft within the range of most small-arms fire, but not here, as detailed by Peter Mersky in his book RF-8 Crusader Units Over Cuba and Vietnam. At this altitude, Coltrin intended to avoid hostile radar. Actually, his RF-8G (BuNo 146871 AH 601) was becoming too hot to handle.

Northeast of Hanoi, Coltrin was tasked with taking pictures of POL (petroleum, oil, and lubricants) installations close to Kep airfield. Capt. Wil Abbott of VF-111, an Air Force exchange pilot, flew escort in an F-8C; Abbott was later shot down in September, making his plane one of only three verified F-8s lost to North Vietnamese MiGs. He was a POW for the ensuing six and a half years before being repatriated in 1973.

Coltrin turned north at Bac Giang after snapping his shots, and Abbott followed closely after. The photographer spotted the 1,200-foot peak he would use as a reference point. The RF-8 suddenly trembled when it was hit by a flak. Bursts of white and black with red cores were abundant in the sky. It wouldn’t take much to bring him down at this height. When he later watched the mission tape, he could see clothes on wash lines as he went through the outskirts of Hanoi since he had flown so low.

‘The snow-covered mountains I thought I had seen from a distance turned out to be 37 mm flak bursts. I felt like every gun and missile site in Vietnam had us in their sights.’

Coltrinn, who was struggling to keep control, saw the large, circular viewfinder on his main panel dissolve and the hydraulic and fuel gauges start to steadily drop. He called Abbott.

`Hey, I’m taking hits. We’d better get out. My hydraulics and fuel are starting to unwind.’

Abbott came back. ‘Can you tell if it’s just the dials?’

`We’ll know in a few seconds’, Coltrinnreplied.

He monitored the gauges as he descended to a safer height, but the damaged plane continued to fly. In order to complete the task, the two pilots moved to a little island to the north of Cam Pha. But did he have enough fuel to return to Oriskany, Coltrin questioned.

After he heard the two Crusader drivers talking, an A-4 tanker pilot in orbit called to offer them fuel if they could rendezvous. Lt. Coltrin finally saw the A-4 with a buddy pack slung underneath after several anxious seconds. Running on adrenaline, it took a few attempts for Coltrin to finally strike the tanker’s basket and absorb enough fuel to recover back aboard. Lacking an airspeed indicator to help him match the A-4’s speed, his issues were made worse. He had to rely on the calls from the tanker pilot.

One sizable piece of a flak round had impacted inches from the main fuel manifold, according to a post-flight inspection, which revealed many bits in his RF-8. Coltrin received one of his three DFCs for the mission.

RF-8 Crusader Units Over Cuba and Vietnam is published by Osprey Publishing and is available to order here.

That Time an RF-8 Pilot did a Super Low-Level High Speed Run Over North Vietnam and Took Photos of Clothes on Wash Lines as he Flew through the Outskirts of Hanoi

Photo by U.S. Navy

July 19, 2023 2 comments

History

The F-16 painted to commemorate the 31st Tiger Squadron of the Belgian Air Component’s 70th anniversary

by Till Daisd July 18, 2023

written by Till Daisd

Our F-16 2021 XTM X-Tiger is now prepared to stalk the skies in an XT-ROAR-DINARY paint for a special event

These awesome images of the new Belgian Air Component “Tiger” F-16 were taken on July 20, 2021, by Andrew Timmerman of Finn Aviation Photography. The aircraft, known as the 2021 XTM X-Tiger, is part of the 31st Tiger Squadron, which is headquartered at Kleine-Brogel Air Base.

“On Friday, July 16, at 10 am, the freshly painted FA-136 “X-Tiger” took to the skies,” reports 31TIGERSQN.BE. Johan Wolfs’ design was carried out by the KeeBee paintshop and plotter section.

“An XT-ROAR-DINARY paint for an extraordinary event, our 2021 XTM X-Tiger is now ready to prowl the skies.”

Timmerman said that the ‘31st Tiger Squadron has been active since 1st October 1951 and they are celebrating their 70th anniversary this year. There will be a special X tiger event that will be held from the 7th-14th of September this year and is also the weekend of the International Sanicole Airshow. Will be several participating members of the NATO Tiger Association joining the exercise so can be sure of some special things for the airshow.’

An F-16 with a specially painted tail was unveiled in October of 2021 by the Belgian Air Component to commemorate 45 years of the Multi-National Fighter Program (MNFP). After the agreement by Belgium, Denmark, the Netherlands, and Norway (the so-called European Participating Governments, EPG), to purchase the F-16, the MNFP was established in June 1975.

Several nations clearly acknowledged the need for new fighter aircraft. The NATO requirement had to be met at the same time, which encouraged these air forces to use a single aircraft. The F-16 multinational aircraft program was started by the EPG’s decision to purchase the F-16 air combat fighter in June 1975. While the European governments purchasing the F-16s are known as the EPG, the air forces flying and maintaining the aircraft are part of the European Participating Air Forces (EPAF).

The USAF’s 1972 Lightweight Fighter prototype program, which attempted to develop a small, cheap, high-performance, air superiority day fighter, gave rise to the F-16.

The EPG had a significant impact in transforming the Lightweight Fighter Program into a significant, multi-faceted acquisition program. The decision to purchase the F-16 made good financial sense because the four EPG nations—Belgium, Denmark, the Netherlands, and Norway—were solid NATO allies of the US and sought to update their F-104G Starfighter interceptor.

July 18, 2023 0 comment

Newer Posts

Older Posts