Flyover kicked off three days of intense training before freshman cadets get recognized.
The B-1B Bone flew a loud, afterburner-fueled low-pass that kicked off recognition. For freshman cadets who were about to endure a relentless three-day exercise known as recognition, the flyover gave them hope. The next three days of their life would suck, but one day it could be them flying an instrument of our nation’s power.
What’s recognition?
Freshman at the Air Force Academy go through an eight-month long training program that is designed to prepare them for battle. The purpose of the intense (somewhat open for debate these days) training is to instill a sense of confidence and fortitude such that no physical pain or mental distress in combat could dissuade an airman.
The regimented life involves running on certain pathways (known as ‘the strips’) to classes, requiring every freshman to greet upperclassmen by name and rank, and keeping dorm rooms in inspection-ready shape at all times. Afternoons after class frequently involve training sessions with upperclassmen requiring the “four degrees” to recite knowledge under stressful mental and physical conditions.
Air Force photo showing the Run To the Rock. Taken by Bill Evans in 2015.
The training culminates in a three-day exercise known as recognition. The event is meant to physically and mentally drain every freshman such that teamwork and a positive attitude is the only thing left. At the conclusion of the training, the cadets ‘run to the rock’. When they arrive at the rock, they are recognized by their upperclassmen as peers.
The flyover took place on Thursday March 9th. Video is by the Air Force Academy’s Facebook page.
A-10 Pilot Don Ramm Recalls the Ups and Downs of Flying the Best Close Support Aircraft Ever Built.
By Don Ramm
Welcome to the flying memories of a peace time pilot. I started pilot training in September of 1973 and dropped my last practice bomb in 1989. The closest I got to anything resembling combat was orders to Korat, Thailand, in 1976. Those were cancelled, and I went to England AFB, Louisiana in the A-7.
In 1978 at the ripe old age of 27 with less than 1000 hours under my belt I was offered the opportunity to fly the A-10. The truth is, I wanted to fly F-16s but didn’t want to endure a tour as an ALO (Air Liaison Officer), a standard “follow on” assignment for many first-assignment attack pilots.
I called MPC (Military Personnel Command), asked the fighter assignments guys what my options were, and was offered an A-10 IP (instructor pilot) job at Davis Monthan AFB near Tucson, AZ.
I spent 1975 – 76 at DM checking out in the A-7 and flying with an operational squadron and liked the area. I was glad to go back. By June 1981 when I left active duty I had logged just over 1000 hours in the Hog.
(U.S. Air Force photo/Master Sgt. Robert Wieland)
1.) Conversion Course and IP School
After a transition course to learn how to fly the “Hog” and drop bombs and shoot bullets from its well known GAU-8 30 mm cannon, I attended the IP course to learn how to instruct. The A-7 was the finest bomb and bullet delivery platform during its heyday in the 70s.
Its computed weapons delivery system was a technological miracle that, when employed by a pilot who knew how to make it work, was capable of unparalleled accuracy. The USAF-wide bombing competitions of the 70s and early 80s were dominated by the A-7.
Moving from that to the A-10 which had no computer (at that time; it does now) took some getting use to. Flying slower and with a nice “hard sight” HUD (heads up display), I was able drop some pretty good bombs in the “low angle” events, but a 45 degree dive delivery (release at 3 or 4 thousand feet as I recall = slant range of more than a mile) was a challenge.
The gun, on the other hand, was point and shoot. Yes, some Kentucky windage was required on a long distance shot but in close it was hard to miss. And, oh, the sound of that gun! Not so much from in the cockpit, but from the ground it was a thrill to hear and watch it work.
One of the nice things about the A-10 which is true to this day: There are no two-seaters. How does one instruct without a two-seater? Of course, all of the trainees were already pilots who had flown at least one airplane that is harder to fly than the A-10 – that is, the T-38.
So, we as instructors did not teach our charges how to fly as much as we were in their subconscious (via FM radio which was used for airplane to airplane communications) as we coaxed them through maneuvers. In the early flights where they just got the feel of the A-10 and in the early air-to-ground rides we would fly a close “fighting wing” position so we could tell what their airplane was doing.
In later flights, the student would fly wing and be pretty much on their own; we would lead the flight and drop our own bombs and shoot our own gun. So I had 600 or 700 hours as an IP and never once had to share the stick with the student.
image via national archives
2.) Two-Seat A-10
Actually, there was one two-seat A-10. It was built by Fairchild and pitched by them as a close support platform that could operate in marginal weather and at night. The Air Force evaluated it in the early 80s but didn’t buy it. I ran across this lone two-seater in 1997 when Tracy (my wife and pilot) and I flew into Edwards AFB.
After doing a touch and go on their 5 mile long runway in our rented T-41, we landed near the Edwards Aero Club in a quiet corner of the base. On the ramp next to the club was one of just about every late model USAF airplane including an F-16, F-4, A-7, even an SR-71, and the only two-seat A-10 ever built.
Not only did we walk among the museum pieces, we climbed on them and no one seemed to mind which is where this picture of Tracy came from.
image via national museum of the us air force
3.) Bicycle Lake
One of the more enjoyable TDYs (temporary duty) we had was a three-week “Red Flag” at Fort Irwin in California. Ft Irwin is about 50 miles northeast of Barstow CA which if you are familiar with that neck of the woods is pretty much in the middle of no where.
As an Army fort it had seen better days. There must have been a hundred houses on base – all were empty. We stayed in the “Q” (Visiting Officer Quarters) – as opposed to the Army troops who were participating in the same exercise; they left on Monday morning and spent the week living in pup-tents “in the field”.
The nice thing about the exercise, of course, was the flying. We flew off of Bicycle Lake next to Fort Irwin. It wasn’t like the WWII days when the Spitfires and Hurricanes took off any direction they pleased. There was a runway plowed out of the dry lake bed. We always took off single ship.
Lead would start a turn right after take off and do a wide 360 over the lake at about 500 feet while his wingman took the runway. It was easy for lead to time his turn so that he rolled out about a mile wide in line abreast from the wingman so the flight was in “tactical formation” immediately after takeoff.
We would routinely fly the entire mission at under 500 feet. (This was in the days when low altitude was thought to be the best way to fly the A-10 – under the radar.)
OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA
4.) Nose Low
One day, the squadron ops office was leading a two ship on a typical mission. His aircraft had just been worked on by the maintenance folks – something which involved putting the gear handle in the up position while on the ground. They did put it back down (it was down when he did his before start checks said the pilot) but apparently not down far enough and for some reason the nose gear was not pinned per standard procedures.
As he fired up the #1 engine, as soon as there was enough hydraulic pressure, the nose gear obeyed what it was commanded to do and folded up. For some reason the mains didn’t retract (perhaps they were pinned) so the A-10 nose hit the hard dirt ramp area driving the gun into the ground. Somehow they picked the nose up, dropped the gear and pinned it.
Except for the dirt in some of the seven barrels of the GAU-8, it looked like all of the other A-10s. The exercise ended a few days later and we flew it home with the landing gear down. (I flew on the crippled Hog’s wing on the way home. I anticipated having lots of fun making “high speed” passes on the stiff-legged A-10, but it wasn’t mean to be.
The ground crew, instructed to leave the gear pinned on the injured A-10, did the same to mine. When I raised the gear handle nothing happened, and I flew home with gear extended as well.)
LANGLEY, Va. — The only operational fifth-generation fighter aircraft will launch into the start of its 2017 air show season in March with a schedule highlighted by popular visits across America and include four international show sights.
The Aerial Combat Command, based at Langley Air Force Base in Virginia, released their official F-22 Raptor schedule on Thursday, one week prior to the official start of the air show season. The news gave the selected show sites cause to celebrate as they took to social media to celebrate the news.
Air Force Major Dan Dickinson will again lead the 19-member F-22 demo team this season as the lead pilot — the only pilot — of the $140 million aircraft of the demo team. To date, Maj. Dickinson has logged nearly 900 hours flying the F-22.
The schedule will see a pair of Raptors visit 23 cities between March through November, and a fly-over only of the Air Force Marathon at Wright-Patterson AFB in September. Four international stops will include Quebec, Canada in June; RAF Fairford, UK in July; Toronto, Canada in September; and Seoul, South Korea in October. The Raptor’s public affairs officials did add that visits to the UK and Korea are subject to change at this time.
In the United States, the F-22 Demo will launch their season on Georgia’s warm golden coast as the team performs over the Wings Over the Golden Isles air show. The inaugural show was a major triumph for the Brunswick community.
“The F-22 Raptor joins the U.S. Navy Blue Angels, the AeroShell Demonstration Team and many other performers to give the Wings Over Golden Isles event a world-class lineup,” John Cowman, president of JLC AirShow Management, said following the announcement. “We couldn’t be more excited about hosting this amazing team in Brunswick.”
The next show stop April 22 and 23 will see the Raptor soar over the proclaimed “Home of Air Dominance”, Tyndall AFB, located just east of Panama City Beach, Florida. The two day air show will include the Air Force Thunderbirds.
“For this year’s show we’ve pulled out all the stops and will feature performances by the Thunderbirds, the F-22 demonstration team, and many more,” Colonel Michael F. Hernandez, Commander of Tyndall’s 325th Fighter Wing said. “On behalf of the more than 5,000 Airmen of Team Tyndall, it is my pleasure to invite you to the 2017 Gulf Coast Salute open house and air show.”
Two weeks later, the fully fueled F-22 will perform over the McEntire JNGB near Colombia, S.C. on May 6 and 7. An F-16 and F-15 will join the Raptor for the free air show event.
Summertime will later usher in demonstrations over Pittsburgh, Miami Beach, Seattle, Chicago, and Jacksonville. The Raptor team will conclude its ambitious season with the Thunderbirds at the Nellis AFB Open House in November.
Spads Were Tough Old Birds and This Medal of Honor Recipient Was Cool Under Pressure.
On 10 March 1966, United States Air Force pilot Major Bernard Fisher was flying a close air support mission with five other A-1E Skyraider pilots over the A Shau valley, near the Laotian border west -northwest of Da Nang in South Vietnam. Fisher was supporting a Civilian Irregular Defense Group (CIDG) / US Army Special Forces camp located in a position to interdict traffic along the Ho Chi Minh trail that was in danger of being overrun by more than 2,000 North Vietnamese regular troops who were surrounding it.
Official US Air Force photograph
Hairy Valley
The situation in the valley and at the SF camp was not exactly news to Fisher and his fellow pilots- Fisher had been awarded the Silver Star for his air support role in the same battle the day before. The weather had not improved either- with a solid ceiling lower than the tops of the 1,500 foot hills around much of the valley, close air support was a risky proposition indeed.
Myers is Grounded
During one of several attack runs on the enemy emplacements one of the other Skyraider pilots, Major Dafford W. “Jump” Myers, was hit by ground fire and forced to land his crippled “Spad.” Using the 2,500 foot-long steel plank runway used to supply the camp by air, Myers was able to crash-land his A-1E and exit the aircraft on the ground with only slight injuries. He then found a spot in which to hole up and wait for a Jolly Green Giant rescue helicopter to pull him out of what was one enormous jam.
Official US Air Force photograph
Desperate Situations Call for Heroic Measures
Meanwhile, as he orbited the downed pilot and took stock of the situation, Fisher realized that the closest helicopter was at least 30 minutes away. After witnessing the crash landing, Fisher believed that Myers was at the very least badly injured. Able to see the North Vietnamese troops closing in on Myers’ position and convinced that Myers would not last much longer on the ground, Fisher contacted the other members of his flight and notified them that he planned to land on the torn up airstrip and pick up Myers.
Only 19 Bullet Holes…
While the rest of the flight pressed covering attacks on the enemy troops, Fisher managed to land on the airstrip and taxi most of the way back down the runway while avoiding holes and debris, under enemy fire, until he was close Myers’ position. Then, while still taking enemy fire, Myers bolted from his hide, climbed onto the Skyraider’s wing and Fisher pulled Myers head-first into the right seat of his A-1E. Despite continuous heavy enemy fire, Fisher was then able to take off from the now-ruined runway and return to his base at Pleiku. Mechanics found 19 bullet holes in Fisher’s Skyraider.
The First Living MOH Recipient of the War
For his heroic action that fateful day in March 1966, Major Bernard Fisher was awarded the Medal of Honor. President Lyndon B. Johnson presented the medal to Major Fisher on January 19th 1967. Fisher was the first living Air Force recipient of the Medal of Honor for action in the Vietnam War.
For the Rest of the Story (Including a Video and a Surprise or Two) Bang NEXT PAGE Below
Jet Stream Winds Played Havoc with Bombs Dropped from 30,000 Feet Over Japan.
On 9 March 1945 the United States Army Air Corps (USAAC) XX Bomber Command initiated Operation Meetinghouse. The Twentieth had been using their B-29 Superfortresses to bomb Japan from bases in the Marianas since November 24th 1944, and from bases in China since April of 1944. Results of their missions were unsatisfactory. A change was necessary. It was time for General Curtis LeMay.
Official US Air Force photograph
The First Raids on the Homeland
America’s very first raid of the war on Tokyo took place on April 18th 1942, when USAAC Lieutenant Colonel Jimmy Doolittle led sixteen twin-engine B-25B Mitchell bombers, launched from the deck of the aircraft carrier USS Hornet (CV-8), to attack Japanese targets including Tokyo and Yokohama.
The bombers were to continue flying west after their attacks and land in China. Because the ships in the task force had stumbled upon Japanese picket boats, the bombers were forced to launch much earlier, and at much longer range from Japan, than planned.
A Morale Boost More Than a Victory
While the raid did little real damage, it provided a much-needed morale boost for an America reeling after Pearl Harbor and the subsequent Japanese sweep through much of the Pacific. The fate of the bombers was sealed when they took off so far from their planned departure point.
None of the bombers reached the planned recovery airfields in China. However, Japan was forced to commit resources to the defense of the home islands, which had been thought to be safe from American attack, for the remainder of the war.
Official US Air Force photograph
You Can’t Bomb From High Altitudes with High Winds
Fast-forward to 1945. Results of the high altitude precision daylight bombing of Japan by XX Bomber Command over the previous 11 months were unsatisfactory, due in large part to very strong high altitude winds aloft over Japan.
These winds, later to be recognized as the jet stream, made the approach to the target areas, the bomb runs, and egress from the target areas after bomb release over Japan problematic. In some cases, B-29 ground speeds were reduced to less than 100 miles per hour when bucking the strong headwinds. When bombing from high altitude, bombing accuracy was significantly reduced by the high winds affecting free-fall bomb trajectories.
The consistently cloudy weather over the Japanese islands also contributed to the overall lack of precision in high altitude precision daylight bombing.
LeMay Makes the Call
General Curtis LeMay, the new commander of XX Bomber Command, took one look at the results of the bombing of Japan from China since April, and especially from the new bases on Saipan, Tinian, and Guam since November, and decided to change the tactics employed by the Twentieth.
There would be no more high altitude precision daylight bombing of Japan. LeMay’s crews would bomb from low to mid-level, and they would bomb at night. The B-29 aircrews tasked with flying the missions harbored misgivings about the changes LeMay instituted.
Attacking between 5,000 feet and 9,000 feet seemed suicidal, and removing all the defensive guns from their bombers except the tail guns made little or no sense to the crews.
For the Rest of the Meetinghouse Story Bang NEXT PAGE Below
The Tiger Was Ahead of its Time, for a Time, But Time Caught Up Quickly
On 8 March 1957, United States Navy Attack Squadron ONE FIVE SIX (VA-156) Iron Tigers accepted the first Grumman F11F-1 Tiger aircraft to enter service. The Tiger came along at a time when supersonic speeds were suddenly a requirement and Grumman did indeed deliver its first carrier-based supersonic fighter. With advanced features like full-span leading edge slats, roll-control spoilers instead of ailerons, all-moving horizontal stabilizers, and area-ruled fuselage design, the Tiger was, at the time of its introduction, in many ways ahead of its time.
Developed From Another Legendary Grumman Cat
At first envisioned as an improved F9F-6/7 Cougar, the resulting design and the refinements made during the development process yielded a completely different aircraft. Ironically, the Tiger’s service life was much shorter than the Cougar’s.
Close But Second to the Skyray
Even though on July 30th 1954 the prototype Tiger first flew without the afterburning engine for which it was designed, it nearly reached supersonic speeds on its maiden flight. When the second prototype flew with the afterburning engine, the Navy had its second supersonic aircraft (the Douglas F-4D Skyray was the first). The aircraft received the new designation F11F-1 in April of 1955.
Headed to The Fleet on The Boat
Carrier suitability trials began on April 4th 1956. The carrier Forrestal (CV-59) hosted the Tiger for trial arrested landings and catapult launches. After successfully completing trials, the aircraft went on to equip several Navy squadrons. The Navy operators of the F11F-1 Tiger were VF-21 Freelancers and VF-33 Astronauts in the Atlantic Fleet and VA-156 Sundowners (VF-111 from January 1959), VF-24 Renegades (VF-211 from March 1959), VF-51 Screaming Eagles, VF-121 Pacemakers, and VF-191 Satan’s Kittens in the Pacific Fleet. Tigers operated from the Essex-class carriers Intrepid (CV-11), Hancock (CV-19), Bon Homme Richard (CV-31), Shangri-La (CV-38), and the Forrestal-class carriers Forrestal (CV-59), Saratoga (CV-60), and Ranger (CV-61).
Up Against Two Legends
The last Tiger was delivered to the Navy on January 23rd 1959. The aircraft only lasted four years in front-line service. Unfortunately its performance was vastly inferior to both the Vought F-8 Crusaderand the McDonnell F-4 Phantom II, both of which were being delivered to the Navy in roughly the same timeframe. The Tiger’s J65 engine also proved unreliable. Coupled with limited range and insufficient endurance, the Tiger was craned off all carrier decks by the end of 1961. The Navy cancelled all orders for the F11F-1 and a proposed reconnaissance version (the F11F-1P) on the books. Only 199 Tigers were built.
For the Rest of the Tiger Story Bang NEXT PAGE Below
We’ve posted a few videos of arrivals at St. Maarten. We’ve even had one of our own avgeeks profile his trip down to the island. It’s a magical place with pristine beaches, beautiful weather, and (of course) gorgeous low flying planes.
Most of the videos out there though show the beach arrivals. While departures toward Maho Beach aren’t unheard of, they aren’t as frequent due to the prevailing winds at the field. Departures towards the beach are a treat. Who could forget that KLM 747 departure video?
This Insel Air MD-80 video rivals that KLM 747 video. The MD-80 looks to be fully loaded or the pilots are just showboating. We’re not sure. Either way, it makes for an impressive and slightly hair raising departure video. In the video you can clearly see inside the main gear wells on departure. It can’t be more than 15-20 feet over the beach. The videographer sure was jazzed about this departure. His choice language at the end shows just how “wow’ed” he really was.
About the MD-80
The MD-80 is twin engine, single aisle, narrow body commercial jet airliner, manufactured by McDonnell Douglas, and later by Boeing. It is a mid size, medium range airliner. This slender aircraft has a number of variants, including the MD-81, the MD-82, the MD-83, the MD-87, and MD-88. The MD-80 can seat anywhere from 130 to 172 passengers, depending on the variant. Each variant also features upgrades in the cockpit and avionics.
The aircraft took its maiden voyage on October 18th of 1979. However, two MD-80 aircraft were severely damaged during the test flights. Despite the early design issues, the MD-80 underwent improvements. The first variant of the MD-80 was introduced with Swissair in October of 1980. The MD-80 series was eventually modified into the MD-90 series.
Almost 1,200 MD-80 aircraft were built between 1979 and 1999, at a unit cost in the 40 million dollar range.
How Could Such a Forward-Thinking Piece of Machinery Like The SR-71 End Up in a Museum?
On 6 March 1990, pilot Colonel Ed Yielding and reconnaissance systems officer (RSO) Colonel Joseph Vida departed Palmdale in California flying U. S. Air Force SR-71 (serial number 61-17972). This was not just another Senior Crown SR-71 flight. Yielding and Vida landed one hour, four minutes, and 20 seconds later at Dulles International Airport outside Washington DC. The last operational flight of the SR-71 set a new Los Angeles to Washington speed record averaging a scorching 2,124 miles per hour (3,420 kilometers per hour), along with three other records. 972 was then delivered to the National Air and Space Museum for display. It was the final flight of the Air Force’s SR-71 program.
What’s in a Name?
Derived from the Lockheed A-12, the development of which is worthy of its own story, the 32 SR-71s built served with the US Air Force from 1964 until 1990. 12 of them were lost in operational accidents. Not a single SR-71 was lost to enemy action. The “Blackbird” was the most common nickname used to refer to the all-black monster, but “Habu” (Japanese venomous snake- a name bestowed while the SR-71 operated from Okinawa) was a moniker as well. Between the original A-12 and SR-71, these Lockheed “Skunk Works” products were the fastest air-breathing (jet-powered) aircraft inhabiting this planet from inception of the A-12 until the final retirement of the SR-71 by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) in 1998.
Rare Materials and Engineering Challenges
The SR-71’s airframe was 85% titanium. Lockheed was forced to pioneer new tooling and fabrication methods just to build the aircraft. Due to the chlorine in tap water, even washing the welded titanium in the airframe components required distilled water. Tools had to be specially manufactured because they too could cause corrosion. Tools wore out quickly during the fabrication process too. Building the SR-71 was one engineering challenge after another.
Hot Stuff
Flying at Mach 3 or more generated friction. Lots of friction. And lots of friction equals lots and lots of heat. For that reason, major portions of the skin of the wings were corrugated. The intense heat would have caused smooth skin (even titanium) to deform and potentially curl up or even split. Conversely, corrugated skin could expand both vertically and horizontally and actually increased longitudinal strength.
Designed to Leak on the Ground
The SR-71s fuselage panels were specially manufactured so they had gaps between them. When the aircraft encountered the heat from in-flight friction the panels would expand and fit properly. It was said that the Blackbird leaked more fuel on the ground than it used in the air. An obvious exaggeration, but the sight of a Blackbird sitting on the tarmac surrounded by dripped puddles of special high-flashpoint JP-7 fuel was a contradiction indeed. If you see a picture of an SR-71 in flight (most of which were captured at low altitude and low speed), chances are you’ll also see fuel streaming back from the as-yet unsealed joints as well.
For the Rest of the Blackbird Story Bang NEXT PAGE Below
Failure or success? It depends how you look at it.
The holy grail of fighter aircraft is one aircraft that meets the operational requirements of both the Air Force and the Navy. The most current attempt at a multi-service design is the Lockheed Martin F-35 “Lighting II.” Historically, the result of such ambitious efforts is an aircraft that does nothing really well, or worked well for one service or had limited combat capabilities.
F-111F (National Museum of the USAF)
The F-111 was an earlier attempt at a supersonic multi-role, multi-service all-weather fighter-bomber. The F-111 was handicapped from the beginning, based on a rather poorly conceived operational specification, with both the Air Force and the Navy pressured to commit to a civilian concept of the “Tactical Fighter Experimental” (TFX) program.
F-111 Formation (Australian Air Force Photo)
The concept called for a single aircraft that was both a nimble, carrier-based Navy fleet-defense interceptor and a more beefy land-based Air Force supersonic strike aircraft. Development focused on the Air Force role, and the F-111B—the naval variant—never made into production.
The F-111 Arrdvark was produced in a variety of models, including the F-111A, F-111D, F-111E, and F-111F, as well as an FB-111A strategic bomber. What the Pentagon had touted as a “cost effective” solution, ironically would be labeled a major aeronautical and financial fiasco in the 1960s. Other designations were assigned to aircraft sold to other nations.
Initially, F-111As had major engine problems. Intense testing by NASA pilots and engineers it was determined that engine inlet dynamics created pressure fluctuations that led to compressor surges and stalls. The engine problems were solved by a major inlet redesign.
The F-111 could operate from tree-top level to altitudes above 60,000 feet (18,200 meters). The major design feature were the variable sweep wings that would allow the pilot to fly from slow approach speeds to supersonic velocity at sea level and more than twice the speed of sound at higher altitudes. The wing angle could be swept to any angle from 16 degrees (full forward for takeoff, landing, and slow flight) to 72.5 degrees (full aft for maximum speeds).
Demonstration of Variable Sweep wings; from Swept forward for takeoff, landing, and slow flight (top left) to fully swept back (bottom right).
In terms of fighter design, the F-111 was unusual in that the two crew members—a pilot and a weapons system/radar operator sat side-by-side in an air-conditioned, pressurized cockpit module that served as an emergency escape vehicle and as a survival shelter on land or water.
In an emergency, both crew members remained in the cockpit and an explosive charge separated the cockpit module from the aircraft. The module descended by parachute. The ejected module included a small portion of the wing fairing to stabilize it during aircraft separation. Airbags cushioned impact and helped keep the module afloat in water. The module could be released at any speed or altitude, even under water. For underwater escape, the airbags raised the module to the surface after it has been separated from the plane.
F-111 Cockpit Escape Capsule (National Museum of the USAF)
Using internal fuel only—tanks in the fuselage and the wings–the plane had a range of more than 2,500 nautical miles. External fuel tanks could be carried on the pylons under the wings and jettisoned if necessary. It also could be refueled in flight via a refueling boom receptacle on top of the aircraft aft of the cockpit.
The F-111 carried conventional or nuclear weapons. It could carry up to nuclear bombs or additional fuel in the internal weapons bay. External ordnance included combinations of bombs, missiles and fuel tanks. The loads nearest the fuselage on each side pivoted as the wings swept back, keeping ordnance parallel to the fuselage.
The F-111 aircraft could dump fuel from an aft nozzle between the engines. The dumped fuel could be ignited when the aircraft afterburners were lit.
The avionics systems included communications, navigation, and electronic counter measure self-defense systems. A radar bombing system was used for precise delivery of weapons on targets during night or bad weather.
The FB-111 also had an automatic terrain-following radar (TFR) system that flew the craft at a constant altitude following the Earth’s contours. It allowed the aircraft to fly in valleys and over mountains, day or night, regardless of weather conditions. The pilot could adjust the ride of the TFR from a “soft” ride to a “hard” ride. In the “soft” mode, the aircraft would anticipate requirements to climb or descent and begin climbs and descents to “smooth” the flight. In the “hard” setting, the aircraft followed the shape of the terrain, making climbs and descents roughly match the rise and fall of the terrain.
Major Variants
F-111A, D, E, and F: The A model first flew in December 1964. The first operational aircraft was delivered in October 1967 to Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada. F-111A models were used for tactical bombing in Southeast Asia. The D. E, and F models incorporated incremental improvements in avionics and weapons systems, aerodynamics and engine performance. These aircraft remained operational through 1995, when they were replaced by the F-16 C/D aircraft.
EF-111 Raven Electronic Warfare Aircraft easily identified by the Pod atop the Vertical fin.
EF-111A Raven: F-111As were converted to serve as electronic warfare platforms. The primary modifications were the ALQ-99 jamming system, N/ALQ-137 self-protection system, and an AN/ALR-62 terminal threat warning system. A total of 42 aircraft were converted to the EF-111A.
FB-111: The FB-111 was assigned to the Strategic Air Command (SAC) as a strategic nuclear-capable attack aircraft. With refueling, the aircraft could reach any target on the globe, and return. In 1990, FB-111s were retired from the SAC role, and converted to the F-111G transferred to the Tactical Air Command as high-performance fighter aircraft.
Using More Than a Dozen Different Aircraft the Aussies and the Yanks Combined for a Near-Total Victory
Beginning on 2 March 1943 and lasting over the next two days, a battle was fought that determined the fate of the Japanese forces engaged against Allied armies on New Guinea. This battle, later known as the Battle of the Bismarck Sea, was not fought between battleships. It was not a night surface action or a destroyer duel. The all-important aircraft carriers were not involved. No Wildcats, Corsairs, Dauntlesses, or Avengers did battle with the Japanese Kates, Vals, or Zeros. Yet, it was such a complete victory for the Allied air forces in the area that the newly-developed and highly effective weapons and tactics used to defeat the Japanese were utilized by the Allies for the rest of the war.
Image via US Navy
Desperately Needed Troops and Supplies Put in Harm’s Way
The Battle of the Bismarck Sea pitted a Japanese convoy carrying urgently needed reinforcing troops and supplies from their bastion of Rabaul on New Britain to Lae on neighboring New Guinea against fighters and bombers of the US Army Air Corps (USAAC) and Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF). Except for a night attack by US Navy PT boats this battle was fought entirely by ships against land-based aircraft.
Success is Where You Find it
The Japanese had successfully landed troops and supplies at Lae before. Even though the Allies were able to decode Japanese radio traffic about a convoy planning to head from Rabaul to New Guinea in January, the attacking USAAC and RAAF aircraft were unable stop it. The convoy, consisting of five transports with five escorting destroyers, succeeded in landing most of their embarked troops and supplies even though the Japanese lost one transport (Nichiryu Maru) and had to beach another one (Myoko Maru) that was heavily damaged.
Image via US Navy
The Snooper Tipped Off the Allies
After a Japanese floatplane type often used for anti-submarine patrols in advance of convoys was sighted on 7 February 1943, General George Kenney (Allied Air Commander- Southwest Pacific) ordered increased aerial reconnaissance coverage of Rabaul believing something was cooking there. A week later there were 79 vessels in port, making it clear that another convoy, destination unknown but inferred, was forming up.
Image via USAF
Code Breakers Reading the Mail
Once naval code breakers were able to decrypt a coded message outlining the Japanese plans for the convoy the American and Australian commanders agreed to hit the convoy in the Vitiaz Strait between the islands of New Guinea and New Britain. This convoy would consist of eight military transport ships with eight escorting destroyers along with air cover consisting of about 100 Japanese fighter aircraft.
It’s a Lot Harder Than It Looks
Hitting a maneuvering ship with a dropped bomb from any altitude is a dicey proposition at best. Up to that point 416 sorties had been flown against Japanese convoys in the New Guinea campaign resulting in only two ships sunk and three damaged. After conferring with experienced RAAF and USAAC pilots, the Allies decided to try bombing from different directions and altitudes simultaneously. Attacks by high altitude bombers would, it was hoped, disperse the convoy and allow more accurate bombing from medium altitude…and low altitude.
Image via USAF
For the Rest of the Bismarck Sea Story Bang NEXT PAGE Below
Did they even turn this helicopter on? Helo appears to hove with the blades perfectly still.
Video has a tendency to make spinning airplane propellors and helicopter blades look warped. It has to do with the shutter speed. The blades are spinning so fast that the refresh rate of the screen and shutter speed create unique blurs and deceptive spinning motions.
But if the shutter speed is fast enough, you’ll be able to capture each blade without a blur. Additionally, if you have a frame rate that is synchronized with the movement of the blades, it will appear as if there is absolutely no movement.
Pretty cool, huh? While you may now know ‘why’ this helo looks like it does in this video, it still looks super weird. Watch for yourself.
Fighter Weapons School at Miramar Turned Good Fighter Pilots into Great Fighter Pilots.
On 3 March 1969 the United States Navy established its Fighter Weapons School at Naval Air Station Miramar outside of San Diego in California. You know the school better as TOP GUN. The school began producing pilots and crews with much improved air combat maneuvering (ACM) skills, who were then able to pass their knowledge on to their squadron mates. TOP GUN also spawned a woefully inaccurate but nonetheless popular 80s movie. But how much do you really know about TOP GUN?
Figuring Out Why Naval Aviators Had Lost the Edge
In 1968, United States Navy Captain Frank Ault was directed by the Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral and Naval Aviator Thomas Moorer, to look into the reasons why the Navy was losing so many aircraft and experienced crews in the skies over Vietnam. More specifically, Moorer and the Navy High Brass were concerned that having procured a fighter aircraft that was not armed with guns might have been a blunder. The Navy and Marine F-4 Phantom IIs were just not scoring kills with their primary (and in most cases only) weapon- the air-to-air missile. Ault’s charter was to figure out why and to propose potential fixes.
Image via US Navy
The Numbers Didn’t Lie
Consider this: Between 2 March 1965 and 1 November 1968 (the days of Operation Rolling Thunder) the United States lost nearly 1000 aircraft in roughly 1 million sorties. Even though both the Navy and Air Force losses were included in these telling statistics, the reasons for the losses were not interpreted by the Navy and the Air Force the same way.
Image via USAF
The Air Force Opinion
Although the Air Force had not commissioned a formal study into the abysmal performance during Rolling Thunder, the Air Force nonetheless came to the conclusion that their losses came about because Vietnamese MiGs, operating primarily at the direction of ground controllers, were routinely being steered by those controllers into positions from which they were both unobserved before they attacked, and most often attacked from behind the Air Force jets. The Air Force interpreted the data and decided that their losses were primarily due to technology.
Air Force Solutions Adopted By All Branches
In order to address what they believed were equipment shortcomings, the Air Force specified and procured the F-4E variant of the Phantom II. The F-4E added an internal M61 Vulcan multi-barrel cannon, additional internal fuel capacity, improved radar homing and warning (RHAW) equipment, more powerful engines, leading-edge maneuvering slats, and more reliable targeting systems for the radar-guided AIM-7 Sparrow and heat-seeking AIM-9 Sidewinder air-to-air missiles. The Air Force also worked with the missile manufacturers to improve quality control during the manufacturing process, which benefitted all parties. The Navy would eventually incorporate some of these improvements into later variants of their Phantom IIs, but did not adopt an internal cannon. Every fighter aircraft developed after the F-4 incorporated an internal gun of some kind.
The Ault Report Reached Different Conclusions
Captain Ault published his report in May of 1968. He reached the conclusion that inadequate air combat maneuvering (ACM) training was the root of the problem. Although he interpreted the poor results attained using the missiles the same way the Air Force did, Ault believed Navy and Marine aircrews were being adequately trained only to maneuver into position to fire their missiles at targets but not in the kind of frenetic maneuvering then taking place in the skies over Vietnam. His conclusions were seconded by the pilots flying the Vought F-8 Crusader. Equipped with four 20 millimeter cannon but a handful to maneuver effectively, the F-8 would also reward pilots who practiced ACM on a regular basis.
Image via US Navy
For More of the TOP GUN Story Bang NEXT PAGE Below.
Tough times call for drastic measures. We came across this video of a RyanAir 737-800 struggling to land at London Stansted Airport during Winter Storm Doris.
In the video, you can see the pilot struggling with both a crosswind and gusty winds. On the approach, the pilot appears to flare but then float as he or she was caught in a gust. The pilot then surprisingly deploys the thrust reversers and plants the plane on the ground. That’s not normal.
What’s wrong with landing this way?
Deploying the thrust reversers prior to touchdown isn’t a very smart way to fly the plane. A good pilot should always be ready to go around. It’s much safer to attempt a second landing than to try to salvage a bad one. In this case, the pilot took advantage of 737 logic that allows the thrust reverser to deploy if the radar altimeter senses less than 10ft of altitude. The landing was relatively uneventful and the pilot and those on board were no worse for the wear.
But what if the gust of wind that he or she corrected for didn’t dissipate but instead grew stronger? By deploying the TRs, the pilot had no choice but to commit to the landing. The TRs would take way too long to stow to accomplish a safe go around in a majority of cases. TR deployment equals total and full commitment to land…full stop.
The video was filmed by ElliotL- CBGSpotterHD. Elliot is an avgeek and spotter with some brilliant videos. Be sure to check out his other work.
No Fuel to Spare, But They Eeked Out a Record That Still Stands.
On 27 February 1947, Colonel Robert E. Thacker (pilot) and Lieutenant John M. Ard (copilot) took off from Hickam Field on Oahu, Hawaii and headed east. Their aircraft, Betty Joe, a P-82B Twin Mustang Air Force serial number 44-65168, landed 14 hours, 31 minutes, and 50 seconds later at La Guardia Field in New York. The flight covered 5,051 miles (8,129 kilometers) and averaged 347.5 miles (559.2 kilometers) per hour.
About That Still-Standing Record
Betty Joe did not stop. Betty Joe did not refuel. Betty Joe took off with a total of 1,816 gallons of fuel and used nearly every drop of it to complete the flight. Thacker and Ard’s flight is still the longest non-stop flight by a piston engine fighter and the fastest flight from Hawaii to New York by a piston engine aircraft. The flight might have been completed in even less time had the pilot jettisoned his empty drop tanks after he drained them as planned!
Genesis of the Twin Mustang
Looking like nothing so much as a pair of P-51H Mustangs joined at the hip or some Photoshopped apparition, the P-82 was originally developed during World War II to fulfill the need for a very long-range escort fighter for B-29s that would be raiding Japan. The design had just barely gotten off the ground when the war ended. The prototype was completed on 25 May 1945. The first flight of the XP-82 was on 26 June 1945.
Image via USAF
The Rare Merlin-Powered Twin Mustang
Oddly enough, initial production P-82s were powered by the Mustang’s Rolls Royce Merlin engine but the remaining production aircraft were all powered by the lower-horsepower Allison V-1710. The Merlin-powered Twin Mustangs eventually became trainers, which meant that P-82 trainers were faster and performed better at altitude than the subsequent Allison-powered production aircraft.
Image via USAF
Deadheading and Scoping the Snoopers
All P-82s became F-82s when the newly-formed United States Air Force changed the P-for-pursuit designation prefix to the F-for-fighter designation prefix on 11 June 1948. Later production aircraft were not equipped with full cockpits and dual controls as the prototype and early variants were. A radar operator occupied the right cockpit in radar-equipped F-82s.
Into Service with SAC First
The F-82E was the first F-82 model to reach operational status in March of 1948, with Strategic Air Command’s 27th Fighter Wing at Kearney Air Force Base in Nebraska. With range and performance that would allow them to escort bombers attacking Russia all the way to the target and back the 27th FW deployed to support air defense and long-range escort missions envisioned due to tensions around the Berlin Airlift. In early 1949, the 27th FW began flying long-range escort mission profiles. Missions from Kearney AFB to Mexico, the Bahamas, Puerto Rico, and nonstop to Washington D.C were all flown.
Image via USAF
For the Rest of the Twin Mustang Tale Bang NEXT PAGE Below.
It Only Took 94 Hours in the Air and More Than 23,000 Miles on the Odometer!
On 26 February 1949 the Boeing B-50A-5-BO Superfortress, Air Force serial number 46-010, named “Lucky Lady II” took off on what was to become the first non-stop around-the-world flight.
Lucky Lady II. Image via Life
That’s Almost 4 Days in the Air!
United States Air Force Captain James G. Gallagher and his crew (including two additional pilots and twice the normal crew complement) departed Carswell Air Force Base in Fort Worth, Texas at 1221 local time and headed east. The Lucky Lady II returned to Carswell 94 hours and one minute later (on 2 March 1949) after flying a total distance of 23,452 miles.
Lucky Lady II refueling. Image via USAF
Slow Bomber Back to Carswell
The Lucky Lady II was a standard B-50A of the 63rd Bomb Squadron, 43rd Bombardment Group and was equipped with the normal B-50A defensive armament consisting of 12 50 caliber machine guns. The bomber did carry an additional fuel tank in its bomb bay to provide additional range. Even with the extra fuel capacity, the B-50 was refueled in midair four times by KB-29 tankers during the mission. Flown primarily at altitudes between 10,000 feet and 20,000 feet, the first non-stop circumnavigation of the planet averaged only 249 miles per hour! ground speed.
The Brass Roll Out the Welcome Back
Strategic Air Command’s commander Lieutenant General Curtis LeMay greeted the Lucky Lady II upon its return to Carswell. Other dignitaries at Carswell for the historic event included Secretary of the Air Force W. Stuart Symington, Air Force Chief of Staff General Hoyt S. Vandenberg, and Major General Roger M. Ramey, commander of the Eighth Air Force. The significance of the event was not lost on LeMay, who took advantage of the opportunity to remark that the Air Force (and of course Strategic Air Command) could now be based entirely in the continental United States and still attack any place in the world that “required the atomic bomb.”
Lucky Lady II after record-setting flight. Image via Life
Record-Setting Crew
For the record-setting flight of the Lucky Lady II, Captain Gallagher was the aircraft commander. 1st Lieutenant Arthur M. Neal was the relief pilot. Captain James H. Morris was copilot. Captain Glenn E. Hacker and 1st Lieutenant Earl L. Rigor were the navigators. 1st Lieutenant Ronald B. Bonner and 1st Lieutenant William F. Caffrey operated the radar. Captain David B. Parmalee was the project officer for this flight and flew as the chief flight engineer. The crew flight engineers were Technical Sergeant Virgil L. Young and Staff Sergeant Robert G. Davis. Technical Sergeant Burgess C. Cantrell and Staff Sergeant Robert R. McLeroy operated the radios. Handling the guns were Technical Sergeant Melvin G. Davis and Staff Sergeant Donald G. Traugh Jr. The Lucky Lady II’s crew was showered with awards including the National Aeronautic Association’s Mackay Trophy and the Air Force Association’s Air Age Trophy. Each crew member also received the Distinguished Flying Cross.
Republic’s Thunderchief Made the Most of 27 Memorable Years in Service.
On 25 February 1984, the Air Force Reserve’s 466th Tactical Fighter Squadron, a part of the 508th Tactical Fighter Wing, made the last operational fight of the Republic F-105D Thunderchief or Thud. The flight occurred 19 years nearly to the day after the F-105 saw its combat debut in Vietnam and a little bit less than 27 years after the F-105 was first accepted for service by the United States Air Force. Air Force Thuds sure packed a lot of service into those 27 years.
F-105D. Image via USAF
Heavyweight Champion
Weighing in at a whopping 50,000 pounds (23,000 kilograms) when it entered service the Thunderchief was the largest single-seat single-engine combat aircraft in history. The F-105 could move at supersonic speeds at sea level and at Mach 2 speeds at altitude. The “Thud” was capable of regularly carrying 14,000 pounds of ordnance and was armed with a 20 millimeter Vulcan Gatling gun.
F-105D. Image via USAF
What’s In a Name?
Without realizing just how effective a weapon the Air Force had in the F-105 yet, derisive nicknames such as “Lead Sled”, “Squat Bomber”, “Hyper Hog”, and “Ultra Hog” were hung on the F-105. It was even said that the Thud was a triple threat in that it could bomb you, it could strafe you, or it could fall on you. Sarcasm aside, the F-105’s strengths, such as its electronics suite and its capabilities, highly responsive controls, and its hair-raising performance, eventually made believers out of pilots who flew the big jet.
Early F-105B. Image via USAF
Another Advanced Century-Series Design Waiting on a Suitable Engine
Initial F-105 prototypes did not perform as expected in part because of aerodynamic inefficiencies like trans-sonic drag in the fuselage design. This led to a redesign of the fuselage with an area ruled “coke bottle” profile similar to that found on the Convair F-102 Delta Dagger and the later F-106 Delta Dart, both of which experienced similar performance improvements after initial models were found to have similar trans-sonic drag issues. The performance of the F-105B was also vastly improved due to the distinctive forward-swept variable-geometry air intakes which regulated airflow to the engine at supersonic speeds and, when eventually installed, the Pratt & Whitney J75 afterburning engine.
Fast Out of the Gate But High-Maintenance Too
Entering service with Tactical Air Command’s 335th Tactical Fighter Squadron in August of 1958 and becoming fully operational in 1959, an F-105B set a world record of 1,216.48 miles per hour (1,958 kilometers per hour). While proven to be quick in the air, maintenance requirements slowed the F-105 to a crawl on the ground, requiring up to 150 hours of maintenance for each flying hour.
Thunderbirds F-105B. Image via USAF
Short Season With the Thunderbirds
For the 1964 show season, the United States Air Force Flight Demonstration Team, otherwise known as the Thunderbirds, modified F-105Bs with fuselage and wing reinforcements, added a smoke generation system. Tragically they flew only six performances with the F-105B before a fatal accident led the team to revert to the F-100 Super Sabre as their show aircraft.
Want proof that you are getting old? The DC-9 is over a half-century old.
Today marks the 52nd birthday for the beloved “Diesel” -9 jet. Back in 1965, Douglas powered up the twin-engine short haul jet for the very first time at Long Beach Airport. The DC-9 took to the skies with the promise of the jet flight comforts on shorter regional flights.
The original DC-9 was a series -10 aircraft. Short and stubby, the first 90 seat passenger jet would be delivered to Delta Air Lines in December of that year. Delta operated the jet until 1993. They later inherited another fleet of DC-9-50s from the Northwest Merger. The final Delta DC-9 flight was flown in 2013.
The DC-9 fleet grew with the -15/-20/-30/-40 and -50 versions each increasing maximum performance and loads. The DC-9 family later gave birth to the MD-80, MD-90 and 717 versions. A total of 976 DC-9s were built with the last original DC-9 produced in 1982.
Even today, there are a few US operators of the original “Diesel” 9 fleet. US Jets and Kalitta Charters both operate small fleets of the elderly jet.
The National World War II (WWII) Museum in New Orleans covers all aspects of WWII. It emphasizes the personal dimensions of combat, often told through first-hand combat accounts of soldiers, sailors, Marines, as well as seen by politicians and civilians.
Still, no account of WWII is complete without recognizing the aircraft that were instrumental (or infamous) throughout the theaters of combat, and the WWII Museum is no exception. Although, unlike any other museum I have visited, all of their aircraft are suspended—none are simply sitting on display.
The First aircraft encountered is a C-47 (military DC-3) Skytrain, the workhorse of the allied forces, carrying and dropping supplies and troops, and towing troop-carrying gliders.
The C-47 above the museum lobby, viewed from the second level inside the Louisiana Memorial Pavilion.
In the Campaigns of Courage building, visitors follow the roads to Berlin and Tokyo. On the road to Berlin, visitors encounter a Bf-109 (commonly known as the ME-109). Designed by Willy Messerschmitt (hence ME-109), it was built by the Bayerische Flugzeugwerke and therefore officially designated as the Bf-109.
While on the road to Tokyo, a restored P-40 Curtiss Warhawk seems to roar overhead in a low attack profile.
Most Museum aircraft are displayed in the US Freedom Pavilion: The Boeing Center. This multi-story building is about twice the height of other museum buildings. Despite the height, viewing aircraft is very easy, and close-up views are easy from three catwalks at different levels. The fourth-floor catwalk provides some impressive views of all aircraft on display.
On display are:
The North American P-52 Mustang, “Bunnie.”
A Douglas SBD Dauntless dive bomber, dive brakes extended.
A Vought F-4U Corsair.
A Boeing B-17E “My Gal Sal.”. There really is no place to stand to get a photo of the entire aircraft without a wide-angle lens. Photos taken from the fourth-floor catwalk.
The North American B-25 Mitchell Bomber—the same type of aircraft featured in “30 Seconds Over Tokyo,” launched from the USS Hornet aircraft carrier. The B-25 exterior gun mounts are shown below.
Grumman TBM Avenger Torpedo Bomber
There are many aircraft not yet represented in the museum’s collection, but the collection is almost certain to grow over the years and space and funding increase. Perhaps a reason to return in a few years.
If You Lose Your Focus on the Flight Deck for Even a Second, You Can Wind Up as a Training Moment
The video starts with Carrier Air Wing 8 flight operations on the flight deck of the USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN-71). According to the flight deck camera time, it is 03:40:57 in the morning of 20 February 1991. The carrier was one of several carriers launching air strikes in support of US and Coalition forces engaged on the ground during Operation Desert Storm in the Gulf War at the time. In just 15 seconds, a completely avoidable accident involving an Intruder‘s engine intake nearly takes the life of a trainee and downs an operational aircraft for weeks.
Working on a carrier deck is serious business
A VA-65 Fighting TigersGrumman A-6E Intruder is undergoing final safety checks in preparation for the cat shot. In the video, a catapult crewman is processing the hookup process. He ensures that the Intruder’s launch bar is seated in the catapult shuttle. He then signals the catapult operator to take tension on the launch bar against the holdback bar. This step in the catapult launch process occurs several seconds before the pilot of the aircraft is signaled to throttle his engines up for launch. The point is that the A-6E’s engines are not operating at (or even near) military (full) power at the time.
Image via US Navy
It is the next step in the launch process for a quality control inspector to examine the catapult shuttle, launch bar, and holdback bar after the catapult crewman signals for tension on the catapult to ensure that all the parts involved in the launch process are mechanically and structurally ready for the cat shot. If the quality control inspector finds something unsafe or requiring adjustment, the entire hookup process is done over again. Conversely, if the inspector does not find anything, the launch process proceeds to the next step, which in this case would be increasing engine power and doing the control surfaces check.
Image via US Navy
Then things went very wrong
But inexplicably, just after the catapult crewman completes the hookup process and exits the area, 21-year-old Petty Officer and flight deck trainee John David Bridges goes to check the position of the catapult shuttle and holdback bar. Bridges does not crouch down as necessary when operating on the flight deck around the intakes on the aircraft preparing for catapult launch – especially Intruder aircraft. Bridges is standing more or less straight up as he enters the critical zone in front of the port side engine intake on the Intruder. What follows is still used as a training tool for all flight deck crew members. We apologize for making you leave the story to view the video, but it’s required reading. (the YouTube uploader changed the settings for the clip after we published the story)
How did he survive?
Bridges is sucked into the port intake of the Intruder at 03:41:11. His flight deck “cranial” helmet, goggles, float coat, and other personal equipment are sucked off his body and ingested into the jet engine, resulting in the massive flame coming from the exhaust. The catapult officer (Shooter) immediately moves to the port side of the aircraft and signals the pilot to shut down his engines. The pilot, having heard the engine receive heavy foreign object damage (FOD) himself, has likely already begun that process.
Luck Or Design of the A-6 Intruder?
What, you may ask, happened to Bridges? Consider for a moment the design of the Intruder. The aircraft has a relatively high wing, low-slung engines mounted forward on the airframe, and intakes that are mounted only a short height above the flight deck. Seemingly a recipe for disaster, correct? Or at the very least the end of Bridges, right? Not so fast!
What saved Petty Officer Bridges that morning in the Gulf was the internal design of the Intruder intakes and the Pratt & Whitney J-52 engines that power the aircraft.
When mounted in the Intruder, the J-52 has a large cone that protrudes in front of the engine and the first stage compressor fan blades. Those blades, and the hundreds of others behind, would almost certainly have killed Bridges had he made contact with them. But when his “cranial” helmet, goggles, float coat, flashlight, and most likely every other piece of gear he had on him were sucked into the engine before him, the engine was practically destroyed. It was still spinning, in large part due to centrifugal force by the time Bridges reached the engine itself. What really saved him was that he was fortuitously wedged between that engine nose cone and the side of the engine intake.
Image via US Navy
Bridges must have been the luckiest guy on an aircraft carrier
Bridges survived the accident. After roughly three minutes, he was able to extricate himself from the intake once the engine spun down and came to a stop. Understandably reassigned after the ordeal, he received minor injuries and one humongous headache. Other personnel who were onboard the Roosevelt at the time have said that because Bridges’ arm went into the intake first, it was his arm that caused him to get wedged as he was. Whatever the reason, Bridges may be the recipient of the world’s luckiest wedgie!
ATC is safe and handles tens of thousands of flight daily. But upgrades move at a glacial speed. Is it time to fix ATC?
Fixed how, you might ask. The answer is to be separated from the FAA. Notice that I did not use the word “privatize” in the title. There’s a reason for that. For one, the word privatize has become a pejorative and hackles immediately go up whenever the word is used in relation to a government entity. Secondly, the word doesn’t accurately describe the changes that should be implemented to make our Air Traffic Control (ATC) system more efficient, less costly, and yes, safer.
The idea of separating the FAA’s air traffic control system into a separate entity comes up every few years and seems to get batted about by the usual suspects making the usual arguments and then put away until the next putative reformer brings the subject up again. That may indeed be the case with our new administration and Congress, but somehow I feel that this time may be different.
And make no mistake, there are some very entrenched interests who like things just the way they are. Much of this sentiment is simply fear that when a large change is made, certain constituencies will lose out at the expense of others. These are valid concerns and should be addressed to allay fears and reassure all parties that the result will be beneficial, or at least neutral in cost to all players. But so far, 87 countries worldwide have already separated their air traffic control services from government to include Canada, New Zealand and Australia, none of them particularly bastions of unfettered capitalism. It’s time we did as well.
The Advantages
There is no natural order in the universe that states US Air Traffic Control services must be organized under the FAA. The idea that ATC services are too safety sensitive to not be under direct government control falls flat. After all, the airplanes which are themselves being controlled are built, flown, and maintained largely by private individuals or privately owned corporations.
We allow private corporations to build and operate nuclear power stations, railroads, harbors, power grids, and now even space programs. All these operations are still closely regulated by their respective government regulatory agencies as would any separate ATC entity, but many organizational and financial advantages would accrue to a private or government owned ATC corporation.
Placing ATC operations into a corporation separate from a federal agency will allow for a much needed agility in the modernization of our air traffic infrastructure. The FAA has been trying for decades to modernize its ATC services and has succeeded only in spending billions of taxpayer dollars with little to show. Programs with names like the Advanced Automation System and NextGen instituted by laws such as AIR-21 and Vision 100 have proven efficient only in their ability to squander oceans of money.
Having ATC services in a separate organization funded by user fees would allow more predictability in budgeting rather than having managers expending resources on political concerns such as sequestration and appropriations. Separating an operational organization from a regulatory agency is also a better management model which helps prevent regulatory capture by operational concerns. Having access to private capital markets would assist in the finance of long term infrastructure as opposed to the current method of political salesmanship.
The Roadblocks
In virtually every attempt at modernization, political considerations inevitably make any progress difficult or impossible to achieve. Questions about who would end up funding the new ATC organization have made each of the players skeptical of a major overhaul. Each of the major users of our ATC system want to make sure that they don’t pay more under any reorganization. And considering that each group feels that other groups aren’t paying their fair share, reform has been difficult.
The FAA is funded mainly through excise taxes on things like passenger tickets and fuel and not through usage fees. The airlines, which purchase the lion’s share of fuel and carry the most passengers therefore paying the most excise tax, feel that general aviation (GA) and business aviation users consume more ATC services than they pay for. They would like to see the funding mechanism converted into a user fee structure. GA users, who are more numerous and generally well-heeled and politically active, resist these efforts through the activities of groups like the Airplane Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA). Business aviation users fall somewhere in the middle of these two groups but are generally opposed to ATC separation from the FAA for fear that the airlines would dominate such an organization.
Labor Concerns
Federal Aviation Administration Anchorage Air Route Traffic Control Center (Wikipedia Commons)
Any new ATC entity will have to address the concerns of all these groups but must also deal with the concerns of controllers themselves who will feel threatened by any move away from the government umbrella of federal wage rules and federal pensions. Their concerns are valid in that any new ATC entity would certainly employ efficiencies and invest in automation systems which could eventually reduce the numbers of controllers needed to operate the system.
Controllers’ unions must be reassured that their members will not suffer financial penalties in the short term. They must also realize, however, that like pilots, their jobs are ripe for the application of automation and that controller ranks will be reduced over time regardless of who is writing their paychecks. Other operational efficiencies can only help their cause by reducing overall costs.
In Conclusion
An ATC system which is separate from a stodgy and politically reactive agency such as the FAA will have a more stable and reliable source of funding allowing capital improvements to be made without the usual red tape. Badly needed modernization will result in a safer national airspace system due to the deployment of the latest technologies available in the most expeditious manner possible.
A separate agency free of political interference will also be more amenable to fostering a customer centric culture which can then concentrate on a primary goal of service and avoids conflicts of interest with the FAA’s primary regulatory functions. Lastly, representation of all major users and labor in the governance of a new and separate ATC organization would ensure that all interested parties have a seat at the table while avoiding the political paralysis of the current system.
