Trending — Page 176 Of 226

The Curious Case of Dr. Dao On A United Express Jet

An airline pilot separates emotion from facts and breaks down the case.

By now we’ve all heard of the events on United Express Flight 3411 wherein a passenger refused to deplane to accommodate some deadheading crew and was eventually dragged off the aircraft by Chicago law enforcement officers. The passenger, Dr. David Dao, suffered some injuries including two broken teeth and had to be treated in a hospital following his forceful removal from the aircraft.

As this is an aviation blog, and before I bury the lede too far, I’d like to look at this event from the aspect of what the pilots could or should have done. The answer is much less than you might expect given that the airplane was parked at the gate and that there were no safety concerns. In spite of what a few keyboard warriors hanging around my blog may assert, federal law concerning pilot authority is quite clear on the limits to a pilot’s responsibility and authority.

But before I dig into that, let’s review the story as it stands so far, shall we?

The incident was captured on various personal devices for our enjoyment and the internet predictably blew up on cue. Many hot takes were given, much outrage was expressed, and many gallons of ink were spilled as everyone who could form an opinion, valid or not, did so. Here are just a few.

Everyone has gotten in on the act

The entire sovereign nation of China, one of United’s largest destinations by customer count, wasted no time in ginning up the indignation sirens claiming that Dr. Dao’s shabby treatment was a result of racial animus against persons of Chinese descent. This had to be revised to accusations of a general anti-Asian bias when it was revealed that the good doctor is of Vietnamese extraction. (The incident was nothing of the sort, and it would be nice if racism wasn’t the knee-jerk go-to explanation for everything under the sun.)

Economists have weighed in on the economics of offering money to entice people to give up their seats. There’s a good reason that economics is called the dismal science, as my head hurts after reading about all the game theory that applies. Perhaps United should have just upped the ante of cash offered. Eventually someone would have taken the deal.

Legal eagles have offered advice concerning the fine print that is contained in the contract of carriage which all passengers agree to when purchasing a ticket. One aviation lawyer I found believes that the airline was justified in removing the doctor as his opinion is that no property right is created through the purchase of a ticket. Another lawyer blog believes otherwise stating that United did not correctly follow its own directives. In the end, it will come down to precedent, case law, and the legal interpretation of words such as “boarded” and “oversold”. The doctor has hired a competent lawyer and is planning on suing everyone in sight. My personal view is that while United may win the legal battle, it long ago lost the PR war.

#flythefriendlyskies @united no words. This poor man!! pic.twitter.com/rn0rbeckwT
— Kaylyn Davis (@kaylyn_davis) April 10, 2017

From a law enforcement point of view, three officers from the Chicago Department of Aviation, were the ones who removed the doctor from the plane. The doctor resisted their efforts and in the process of this resistance hit his face on an armrest resulting in his injuries. At least one of the officers has been placed on leave for not following standard operating procedure (SOP). While I have no doubt that an investigation will determine whether SOP was followed or not, it seems to me that if a 69 year old man can’t be removed from an airplane without being bloodied then perhaps they were doing it wrong. On the other hand, resisting law enforcement is never a good idea.

Civil libertarians of course see this as one more road sign along the route to the coming police state. I’m not so sure that this incident is reflective of an improper use of law enforcement. After all, should you plant yourself on a couch at Macy’s at closing time and refuse to move, you will likely be escorted off the property by some form of law enforcement given enough time. United for its part has forsworn the future use of law enforcement to remove passengers. I think I can safely predict a new class of delay as passengers refuse to disembark for this reason or that and nothing gets done.

For some homespun humor and common sense about the incident we turn to Mike Rowe who points out that a simple appeal to reason would have quickly resolved the problem.

Lastly, many are pointing out that the good doctor himself has a somewhat shady past involving drugs and sex which cost him his medical license for a while. Even the doctor’s story as to why it was important for him not to be removed was not quite true. So what does this have to do with anything that happened on the airplane? Absolutely nothing. Nothing, that is, unless you are a lawyer trying to paint the doctor as a quick witted grifter who intentionally acted out in search of a pay out. It will be left to the lawyers, judges, and jurors to sort that one out.

Pilot’s Authority

The pilots of United were quick to point out that this incident actually took place on a Republic Airways owned and operated flight hoping to avoid association with the affair. That’s some facile reasoning as the airplanes are branded with the United brand and the Republic employees are clothed in United uniforms. But the pilots probably shouldn’t be so defensive. The pilots on that plane likely had zero input into any of the events that transpired. They may not even have known what was going on until the police arrived.

This of course brings us back to the topic of what the pilots could or should have done. There may have been a time in the distant past where pilots were expected to exercise authority over every aspect of the operation. Think back to, say, a Pan Am Model 314 making its way around the Pacific Rim in 1939. Back then the captain was the chief customer service agent and company representative. He had to be. There was no one else around.

Today things are different. Ticket agents, operations agents, boarding agents, customer service agents, ground operations supervisors, and the big kahuna, complaint resolution officials control nearly all aspects of airline customer service while the airplane is parked at the gate. They decide who goes on and who gets pulled off. The pilots do not.

Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs) are quite clear on this matter. Here’s the relevant text:

§91.3 Responsibility and authority of the pilot in command.

(a) The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft.

(b) In an in-flight emergency requiring immediate action, the pilot in command may deviate from any rule of this part to the extent required to meet that emergency.

In case you were wondering, the term “operation of that aircraft” does not include who gets denied boarding while parked at the gate. Do pilots have any input into this process at all? Yes, but only from a safety or security point of view.

For instance, should a flight attendant inform me that a customer appears to be inebriated during boarding, it is my responsibility to make sure we don’t fly with an inebriated passenger, which is a violation of FARs. However I have been given zero training in recognizing the signs of inebriation. Perhaps the passenger has a medical condition or just took a pill to help with anxiety. I don’t have the slightest way to tell.

Fortunately, the airline has hired and trained individuals who do have the expertise to make such a call. In fact all airlines expect their hired and trained experts to handle such customer service issues. Any pilot who came charging out of the cockpit to throw a passenger off for anything other than a clear safety issue would quickly find himself in the chief pilot’s office making arrangements for an unpaid vacation or the target of a discrimination lawsuit or both.

In the case of a mis-boarded passenger as was the case here, pilots have little or no input. Oh sure, pilots can offer an opinion, but customer service issues are the purview of customer service agents. And once law enforcement arrives to remove a passenger at the direction of ground operations, pilots again have zero official input.

In Conclusion

United airlines unwittingly touched the third rail of customer dissatisfaction by becoming a lighting rod for an ocean of pent up frustration concerning airline passenger treatment (to mix metaphors). This frustration is no doubt heavily contributed to by the goons running the TSA, but it is the airlines’ problem to solve. All airlines should do themselves a big favor by using this unfortunate incident to take a good look in the mirror and to ask themselves why their customers are so ready to grab the pitchforks when it comes to customer service. Incidents like this don’t help.

Operation Eagle Claw: The Rescue Mission That Died in the Desert

-

April 24, 2017

Operation Eagle Claw: The Rescue Mission That Died in the Desert

Sweeping Changes in the Special Operations Community Resulted from the Deadly Debacle at Desert One.

During the night of 24 April and into the morning of 25 April 1980, Operation Eagle Claw went from a daring and innovative rescue operation to bring home the 52 American hostages held by Iran to a failed mission that changed the way the American military conducted such missions. The failure of Operation Eagle Claw is also considered to be at least in part responsible for the ascendance of Ronald Reagan to the White House in 1980.

Setting the Scene

Three weeks before the rescue mission was to take place a very remote airfield in the Iranian desert was surveyed and infrared lights and strobes placed to assist pilots landing at the site. The field itself was checked and determined to be hard-packed sand- perfectly suitable for the rescue aircraft. The operational plan dictated that the site, dubbed “Desert One” would be secured by United States Army Delta Force and Rangers operators and about 6,000 gallons of jet fuel for the helos would be pre-positioned there.

Putting the Pieces in Place

US Air Force assets were the three Lockheed EC-130E Commando Solos, using the call signs Republic 4, 5, and 6, and the three MC-130E Combat Talon 1s, using the call signs Dragon 1, 2, and 3. The EC-130Es carried fuel bladders and personnel. MC-130Es carried personnel, supplies, and equipment. Eight US Navy RH-53D Sea Stallions normally assigned to Helicopter Mine Countermeasures Squadron (HM)-16 Seahawks and HM-14 Vanguard went aboard the aircraft carrier USS Nimitz (CVN-68). Ostensibly aboard the carrier for a minesweeping mission, the helos were thoroughly checked and rechecked by their combined Navy and Marine Corps crews. They would use the call signs Bluebeard 1 through 8.

A Not-So Simple Plan

The overall plan was to fly to Desert One, refuel, then continue on to Desert Two, located 52 miles from Tehran. The American force would overnight at Desert Two and conduct the actual rescue the second day. The plan became more daring and risky with each hour. The Delta operators would drive from Desert Two to the American Embassy in Tehran to free the hostages. Army Rangers were to capture a nearby air base where Lockheed C-141 Starlifters would land, grab the hostages and their rescuers, and depart Iran. Other US Army troops were tasked with disabling electrical power. Even USAF AC-130 Spectre gunships would get in on the action by providing on-call close support of troops in contact on the ground in the Tehran area.

War Paint

Aboard the Nimitz and the aircraft carrier USS Coral Sea (CVA-43), efforts were underway to avoid blue-on-blue (friendly fire) accidents. The Iranians were also operating Grumman F-14A Tomcats and McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom IIs at the time. Because they were tasked to provide air cover over Tehran, the similar Navy and Marine carrier-based aircraft were adorned with “invasion stripes” by the crews. Carrier Air Wing 8 (CVW-8) aboard Nimitz and CVW-14 aboard Coral Sea painted these stripes on the upper and lower surfaces of the right wings of their aircraft.

Invasion Stripes

Fighter Squadron (VF)-41 Black Aces and VF-84 Jolly Rogers used red and yellow stripes on their F-14A Tomcats. Attack Squadron (VA)-35 Black Panthers and Light Attack Squadron (VA)-82 Marauders and VA-86 Sidewinders aboard Nimitz painted orange stripes on their A-6E Intruders and A-7E Corsair IIs. Marine Fighter Attack Squadron (VMFA)-323 Death Rattlers and VMFA-531 Grey Ghosts painted red and yellow stripes on their F-4N Phantom IIs. VA-196 Main Battery and VA-27 Royal Maces and VA-97 Warhawks aboard Coral Sea painted orange stripes on their A-6E Intruders and A-7E Corsair IIs. All stripes were bordered with thin black stripes.

Off to a Good Enough Start

Things started out well. Departing from Masirah in Oman, the airlifters negotiated the first leg of their mission well. Except for some damage to one of the MC-130Es (Dragon 1) caused by a hard landing (the aircraft remained flyable), the protection personnel and some additional troops landed without incident after dodging habitation and the Zagros Mountains. The American troops on the ground deep within Iran prepared the site for the arrival of the Navy helos. The second two MC-130Es landed and offloaded the personnel and equipment aboard, and then returned to base in Oman to prepare for the next night’s missions. It was at this point that the operation began to unravel.

Why There? Why Then?

A tanker truck smuggling fuel came upon the site and was blown up by a Ranger team controlling the roads in the area. Although not a specific threat to the mission, the explosion and fire brought the clandestine site to the attention of everyone within miles. The incoming helos even used it to help them find Desert One. Soon thereafter, at roughly 2130 local time, a bus appeared on the scene driving on what was to be used as a runway. As a civilian vehicle it was stopped and the 40-plus passengers held. It was about time for the helos, or what was left of them, to arrive.

Dominoes Start to Topple

The first hint of trouble was aboard Bluebeard 6. The crew received a sensor notification that a rotor blade was cracked. Bluebeard 6 was sanitized of all material that might give the mission away and then abandoned in the Iranian desert. Bluebird 8 picked up the crew and continued toward Desert One. The other helos then encountered first a small, and then a much larger, “haboob”, essentially a hundred mile long persistent dust storm suspended in the air up to thousands of feet high. Unable to avoid these dangerous weather phenomena, Bluebeards flew through them both. Bluebeard 5 turned around and landed but the other helos did observe not them land. Bluebeard 5 eventually took off and headed toward Desert One. Another Bluebeard was forced to return to base (RTB) with instrumentation problems. This left six of the original Bluebeards available for the airlift to Desert 2. Ironically the Air Force airlifters had encountered the haboobs but failed to pass word to the helos inbound to Desert One.

For the Rest of the Operation Eagle Claw story bang NEXT PAGE below.

Extremely Hard Landing Of Jumbo Boeing Jet Caught On Tape

Avgeekery

-

April 23, 2017

Extremely Hard Landing Of Jumbo Boeing Jet Caught On Tape

Wow…Glad I wasn’t on that flight.

It’s one of the those hold your breath videos. A Massive Boeing 747-400 cargo jet operated by Silkway Airlines landed, err…smashed into the runway at Shiphol International Airport last month. The jet appeared to encounter a large sink rate during its flare. Instead of going around, the jet continued and hit the ground with a vengeance. It hit so hard that the jumbo Boeing bounced at least 20 feet back into the air. The pilot then stabilized the jet and landed with a seat cushion still attached to his backside.

Why didn’t they go around?

I’m not sure actually. If a pilot encounters a severe downdraft (caused by weather or wake turbulence), the typical reaction is to get out of the situation–execute a go-around–and try again with a more stable approach.

The good news is that while the jet probably needed a hard landing inspection, it looks like no one was hurt in the incident, save for a bruised ego and YouTube infamy.

The first video is by ddb.aviation.
The second video of the same landing is shot by Dutch Spotter.

Starliner 75 Is One Strikingly Beautiful Jet

Joe Vaeth

-

April 23, 2017

Starliner 75 Is One Strikingly Beautiful Jet

If you’re holding short in Seattle or flying through the Pacific Northwest or Alaska then you may see this Alaska Airlines Boeing 737-800. It has even been spotted as far south as Hawaii. “Starliner 75” was unveiled in 2007 to celebrate Alaska Airlines’ 75th anniversary. It’s vintage paint job is from the 1940’s and the aircraft made its inaugural flight was from Seattle to Anchorage.

The design for “Starliner 75” was selected by the Alaska Airlines employees by popular vote from a listing of four other historical liveries. These included the 1950s Blue Thunderbird, early 1960s Red Thunderbird & late 1960s Golden Nugget designs.

A good vintage
The livery was orginally introduced in 1945 when Alaska Star Airlines changed its name to Alaska Airlines. The 2007 paint job features an original Alaska Airlines logo, map of Alaska with the North Star, 75th anniversary logo on the tail, 1940s Boeing logo – near nose, and blue star prominently displayed on her nose.

Aviation Pioneers on America’s Last Frontier
Alaska Airlines grew from a single aircraft operation in 1932 originally providing charter service between Anchorage and Bristol Bay known as Mc Gee Airways. This operation was one of the first commercial outfits to make use of 2-way radios to monitor weather conditions and optimize loads. In 1935 the two bush operators Star Air Service and Mc Gee Airways merged and took the name Star Air Lines. After the merger the aircraft all started sporting a bright white star on the fuselage. The airline would later beat out a competitor by name of Art Woodley over a matter of $15 to claim the name Alaska Airlines. Woodley’s attorney neglected to include a check to cover the $15 filing fee and the rest is now history. Star Air Service incorporated under the name Alaska Airlines in 1944.

Alaska Airlines has grown from a single aircraft operation in 1932 to be the fifth largest U.S. carrier, serving 118 destinations. They recently acquired Virgin America.

https://www.alaskaair.com/content/travel-info/our-aircraft/738-starliner.aspx

Fatal U2 Crash in CA Last Year Blamed on Student Pilot Error

Military History

Mike Killian

-

April 22, 2017

Fatal U2 Crash in CA Last Year Blamed on Student Pilot Error

A tragic error by a student pilot on his first U-2 training flight killed instructor Lt. Col. Ira Steve “Shooter” Eadie last September in Northern California, according to the results of a U.S. Air Force accident investigation report released this week.

The aircraft, a TU-2S assigned to the 1st Reconnaissance Squadron, part of the 9th Reconnaissance Wing at Beale Air Force Base, was conducting an “acceptance flight” training mission, the first of three for the trainee, which is standard practice for potential new U-2 pilots to familiarize themselves with operation of the aircraft under the supervision of a highly-experienced instructor.

According to the report, the student pilot (whom will remain unnamed per USAF privacy policy) was performing an “approach to stall” maneuver when he accidentally put the bird into an unintentional secondary stall while trying to recover from the first.

The aircraft actually performed the simulated stall 3 times. The first stall went well (flown by the student), while the second was flown by Eadie to show the student “less aggressive” use of controls and smoother yoke movement.

The fatal mistake occurred on the third try.

During the training maneuver, the engine isn’t actually shut down, but instead goes into an “aerodynamic stall”, requiring the pilot to drop the nose and gain velocity to generate enough lift to stabilize the aircraft and resume safe flight.

The fatal error occurred because the student pulled out of the simulated stall too quickly and demanded too much vertical movement, before the spy plane known as Dragon Lady was capable of safely flying again.

The $32 million aircraft then went into a sharp left wing drop and excessive nose-low attitude; the crew was no longer in control, and was rolling upside down while also approaching the minimum uncontrolled ejection altitude.

At this point, Lt. Col. Eadie calmly gave the command to EJECT, and while his student pilot bailed out safely with minor injuries, Eadie himself slammed into the plane’s right wing, breaking off a 5-foot chunk of it and resulting in his death.

Eadie’s lap belt may not have been secured when he ejected too, based off burn analysis on the belt.

Lt Col. Eadie perished in the crash. (Photo: USAF)

The aircraft crashed into uninhabited grassy foothills south of the Sutter Buttes mountain range in the Sacramento Valley, and while nobody on the ground was injured the crash did set off a 250-acre wildfire.

“The purpose of this report was to identify the causes and contributing factors which may have contributed to the incident,” said Brig. Gen. David S. Nahom, president of the Accident Investigation Board. “This was a terrible tragedy, and our heartfelt condolences go out to Lt. Col. Eadie’s family.”

Eadie, a Florida native, was a 20-year military veteran of both the Navy and USAF, father of six and grandfather of a baby girl.

His student pilot has since recovered from his injuries and completed the necessary training required to pilot the U-2, and is doing so now.

Tiger Flight Foundation is Educating Today’s Youth Through Aviation

History

Charles Atkeison

-

April 22, 2017

Tiger Flight Foundation is Educating Today’s Youth Through Aviation

ROME, GA — Education is soaring to new heights as the Tiger Flight Foundation teaches children to set goals and to take a more active approach in controlling their own life, both on the ground and in the air.

Classroom sessions and flights by several tiger striped aircraft are inspiring preteens and teenagers from Georgia, Tennessee and Alabama to find specific ways to work harder to better themselves. Tiger Flight is also introducing a strong interest in aviation to many preparing to enter high school.

“Leading the young to the dream of flight” is the foundation’s quest as the nonprofit organization steers young adults in becoming successful individuals and taking “command of their own lives”.

Based at the Richard B. Russell Airport near Rome, Tiger Flight’s roots began seventeen years ago as two metro Atlanta pilots looked to form a civilian flight team. The foundation has since grown to include a Formation Flight Team, an education workshop, and an aviation museum open inside a World War II hanger at the airport.

“We began in 2000 and the main purpose of Tiger Flight is really motivation helping boys and girls to become pilots in command of their own lives,” explains Robert Young, the foundation’s Chairman of the Board. “We use the airplanes as a hook to get them up in the airplane and to give them enthusiasm and excitement.”

The non-profit organization expanded from being a stand alone flight team to begin including discussions to motivate preteens and teens to take charge of their lives in 2006.

“Taking responsibility, believing in themselves, setting goals, measuring their results, putting a plan together,” states Phil “Sunny” Cataldo who realized the concept of adding the educational resource. “Suddenly, Tiger Flight became a children’s motivational program along with being a formation flight team.”

During an April visit, this aerospace reporter arrived at Russell Airport in time to see three orange with black tiger stripes Alon A-2 Aircoupes aircraft soar across the blue morning sky. On board each aircraft was a young adult interested in the possibility of becoming a pilot, or working as a student with the goal of an aviation career.

Rachel, an eighth grader who lives in Chattanooga, took flight for the first time through Tiger Flight and was thrilled by the experience on this spring morning, “Riding in the aircraft was very cool and enjoyable as we sped down the runway, and then my entire life changed — we were flying!”

Rachel joined fifteen fellow young adults who flew that day, and added that she would love to fly again. Young adds that several of the pilots visit classrooms across north Georgia as they give their Pilot in Command motivational talk to inspire children new to aviation.

The flight team performed during the Thunder in the Valley Airshow in nearby Columbus in April, and will prepare soon for their annual participation in October’s big airshow Wings Over North Georgia located at their home airfield.

“We do several air shows a year, and we invite the public to come up here,” Sunny states. “We will have a routine as we perform a few passes over the airfield.” The Tiger pilots traditionally perform the Missing Man Formation during airshows as well as execute several tight wing-to-wing formations during their show.

Weather permitting, Sunny and his team will be poised next to their aircraft on May 13 to talk one-on-one with the public about the foundation, and to answer questions about their formation flying.

The pilots volunteer their time and their airplanes to Tiger Flight in support of the foundation, and Sunny adds that none of the money raised goes toward the aircraft but toward the education they provide.

To learn more about joining Tiger Flight visit TigerFlightFoundation.org.

(Charles Atkeison reports on aerospace and technology. Follow his updates via social media @Military_Flight.)

Richtofen: The Red Baron was the First Ace of Aces

Vintage Aircraft

-

April 20, 2017

Richtofen: The Red Baron was the First Ace of Aces

Manfred von Richtofen’s 80 Victories Was Tops For World War I

On 21 April 1918 German ace fighter pilot Manfred von Richtofen was shot down and killed. Various accounts indicate that the “Red Baron” was shot down either by one of several British Empire (Canadian) SE5A fighters or by ground fire while engaged in a low-altitude dog fight with the fighters Richtofen’s demise brought to an end the Imperial German Army Air Service’s top ace of World War I, having achieved an unmatched total of 80 official aerial victories.

Grounded With an Eye on the Skies

Richtofen began his career in the service as a cavalry reconnaissance officer on both the Eastern and Western Fronts, seeing action in Russia, France, and Belgium. Richtofen considered his talents wasted as a dispatch runner and telephone operator. When he was transferred to a supply assignment, he impulsively applied for and received a transfer to Die Fliegertruppen des deutschen Kaiserreiches (Imperial German Army Air Service), later to be known as the Luftstreitkräfte. Manfred joined the flying service at the end of May in 1915.

Early Unconfirmed Kills

Richtofen scored an unconfirmed kill as an observer and later entered pilot training in October of 1915 after meeting German ace fighter pilot Oswald Boelcke. Although Richtofen did not initially impress anyone with his flying skills (he crashed his first time out), he kept at it and became first proficient and then quite skilled at the controls of the Albatros fighters used by the Germans. He scored another unconfirmed kill in April of 1916. When Boelcke and Richtofen again met, Boelcke selected Richthofen to join one of the first German dedicated fighter squadrons, Jagdstaffel 2.

First Victory and those Silver Cups

Richthofen scored his first confirmed aerial victory on September 17^th 1916. Thus began a 19-month odyssey that included the ordering of silver cups engraved with the type of aircraft the Red Baron had shot down and the date of the aerial victory. He had collected 60 cups when the short supply of silver in Germany prevented the practice- but he didn’t stop flying and fighting or racking up victories. His tactics were considered conservative but they were effective enough. He and his squadron typically attacked from above and with the sun at their backs- tactics which still used today.

Needing a More Agile (and Red) Fighter

Richthofen’s victory over British ace pilot Major Lanoe Hawker VC on November 23^rd 1916 convinced him that he needed a more agile fighter. He flew several different versions of Albatros biplanes until he flew the iconic Fokker Dr.I triplane. Richtofen only scored 19 of his 80 victories in the triple-decker and those only after its wings were strengthened. The first time Richtofen painted his fighter in that look-at-me red color was in January of 1917.

For the Rest of the Red Baron Story Bang NEXT PAGE Below

Six Things You Probably Never Knew About the Mighty A-6 Intruder

-

April 18, 2017

13

Six Things You Probably Never Knew About the Mighty A-6 Intruder

The Navy’s Uniquely Capable All-Weather Attack Jet Went Where Others Feared to Fly

One of a Kind Indeed

On April 19^th 1960, the prototype Grumman A-6 Intruder, Grumman model G-128 and designated the YA2F-1, BuAer 147864, lifted off from Grumman’s Calverton facility for the first time. Nearly 37 years and 693 Intruders later, on February 28^th 1997, Medium Attack Squadron 34 (VA-34), the Blue Blasters, retired the Navy’s last operational A-6E Intruders. Those 37 years were remarkable in many ways. The Intruder was one of a kind, and we’ll probably never see another aircraft like it. Or one as capable.

Conceived in STOL

The A-6 originally had swiveling exhaust nozzles (up to 23 degrees downward) intended to shorten takeoffs and landings. Flight testing revealed that performance was not significantly improved by variable thrust direction so the swiveling exhaust nozzles were removed. This was the reason for the location of the Pratt & Whitney J52-P6 engines on the airframe, and the reason why they could be dangerous to deck crews. The exhaust nozzles on the production A-6 were still angled a couple of degrees outward in order to avoid turbulence at the horizontal stabilizers.

The Competition

The initial US Navy Bureau of Aeronautics (BuAer) proposal received 11 different submissions from Bell, Boeing, Douglas, Lockheed, Martin, North American, and Vought. And of course Grumman. The Grumman A-6 design team was led by Lawrence Mead Junior. Mead was also instrumental in the design and development of two other notable Grumman products; The F-14 Tomcat and the Lunar Excursion Module (LEM) that took our Apollo astronauts to the surface of the moon.

Decelerons and Brakes

The Navy awarded Grumman a contract to build eight A2F-1s in February 0f 1958. The first delivery of an A-6A Intruder to the US Navy was to the A-6 Fleet Replacement Squadron (FRS) VA-42 Green Pawns on February 7^th 1962. The A-6A became operational with VA-75 Sunday Punchers for the first time in 1963. A-6As had both fuselage and wing air brakes. The fuselage airbrakes caused controllability problems. The fuselage air brakes were removed, but the “decelerons” (often referred to as “boards”) on the wing remained. The Intruder subsequently retained leading edge slats and decelerons on all models.

A Unique Office Arrangement

The two-place, side by side cockpit of the Intruder put the pilot on the port side of the aircraft and the bombardier-navigator (BN) on the starboard side. However, the BN’s seat was slightly lower and located farther aft. The Intruder was the first fleet aircraft with an integrated diagnostic system for aircraft status, called Basic Automated Checkout Equipment (BACE). In order to train Intruder crews and after finding Douglas TA-3B Skywarriors unsuitable, the Navy and Grumman built nine TC-4C Adademes, Gulfstream I twin-turbine executive aircraft with the nose section (and the associated electronics) of an Intruder faired onto the nose. These trainers were flown by the A-6 FRS.

Ugly But Well Hung

The design of the Intruder was driven by the size of the two radars needing to be installed in the nose as well as desire to improve crew coordination by seating them side by side in the cockpit. The Intruder‘s large blunt nose and slender tail inspired a number of nicknames, including “Drumstick”, “Double Ugly”, “The Mighty Alpha Six”, and “Iron Tadpole.” But on its five wet (capable of carrying fuel) hard points the Intruder could carry and deliver a war load unlike any other Navy jet. For that, Double Ugly was one beautiful airplane.

DIANE Makes Them Wonder

After the 1962 BuAer aircraft re-designations the A2F-1 became A-6A. The heart of the A-6A was the Digital Integrated Attack Navigation Equipment (DIANE) system, which provided an electronic display of targets and geographical features even in low visibility conditions. The iconic early example of the Intruder’s ability to hit targets any time was when two A-6As attacked a North Vietnamese power plant during a particularly dark and stormy night. The Intruders dropped 26 Mark 82 500 pound bombs on the target, but the damage they caused convinced those on the ground that B-52s had carried out the attack instead.

To War in Vietnam

Intruders first went to war in Southeast Asia during 1965 aboard USS Independence (CVA-62). The first Intruder loss in Vietnam took place on July 14^th 1965 when Navy Lieutenants Donald Boecker and Donald Eaton of VA-75 Sunday Punchers with CVW-17 aboard USS Independence (CVA-62) were shot down. Both pilot and BN ejected and both survived. The Navy and Marines lost a total of 84 Intruders during the Vietnam War (to all causes) while flying more than 35,000 sorties. Marine Intruder squadrons remained shore-based throughout the Vietnam War, with one notable exception: VMA(AW)-224 Fighting Bengals replaced VA-35 Black Panthers as the all-weather attack squadron in CVW-15 when they deployed aboard USS Coral Sea (CVA-43) during her 1971-1972 WestPac. The last Intruder loss in Vietnam took place on January 24^th 1973 when Navy Lieutenants C.M. Graf and S.H. Hatfield of VA-35 Black Panthers with CVW-1 aboard USS America (CVA-66) were shot down. Both pilot and BN ejected and survived.

Ruling With an Iron Hand

The 19 A-6B variants built were originally intended to be a clear-air (not all-weather capable) versions of the A-6A but were instead adapted to perform the air defense/surface-to-air missile (SAM) defense role, or in Navy parlance, Iron Hand missions. The A-6Bs saw above-average losses, in part due to the inherent risk of the Iron Hand mission itself. Because the basic A-6A was also capable of employing the anti-radar missile of the day, the AGM-78 Standard ARM, the 14 surviving A-6Bs (5 were lost in combat) were eventually reworked to the A-6E specification during the mid-1970s.

The TRIM Difference

The 12 A-6C variants built were fitted with the Trails Roads Interdiction Multi-sensor (TRIM) mounted in a mid-bottom fuselage location. This early version of a Forward-Looking Infrared (FLIR) and Low Light-Level Television (LLLTV) set was capable of detecting vehicles, trains, and other targets at night, turning the A-6C into a night hunter. The A-6C also carried the “Black Crow” engine ignition sensor for truck targeting. The first squadron to fly the A-6C in combat was VA-165 Boomers with CVW-9 aboard USS America (CVA-66). The A-6Cs were all eventually reworked to the A-6E specification, but the TRIM-equipped A-6Cs blazed a trail for the A-6E TRAM to follow.

Dedicated TexacoTadpoles

78 A-6As and 12 A-6Es were reworked for use as KA-6D tanker aircraft. The fleet’s KA-3B and EKA-3B Skywarriors were getting long in the tooth and never were exactly dainty aircraft. The Intruder tanker conversions were completed during the early 1970s. Most of the mission-specific electronic equipment was removed from these dedicated “Texaco” tankers. The age old NavAir edict stating “you can never too much gas in the air” was eased somewhat by the presence of the KA-6Ds but there weren’t enough of them to go around. Each squadron was equipped with three or four of them and they were often swapped (cross-decked) from carrier to carrier as one returned from deployment and another departed. They were eventually replaced by another re-tasked aircraft- the Lockheed S-3 Viking. Now they use Super Hornets!

A 6E VMAAW 121 in flight over Florida 1982

Leatherneck Intruders

The Marine Corps operated Intruders with distinction for many years. Marine Corps All Weather Attack Squadrons VMA(AW)-121 Green Knights, VMA(AW)-224 Bengals, VMA(AW)-225 Vagabonds (later AKA Vikings), VMA(AW)-242 Batmen (later AKA Bats), VMA(AW)-332 Moonlighters (earlier AKA Polkadots), VMA(AW)-533 Hawks, and VMAT(AW)-202 Double Eagles (Fleet Replacement Squadron) all flew the A-6.

Bang NEXT Page to Read the Rest of the Intruder Story

April 18th Was A Great Day In Aviation–Some Amazing Videos In Here

Military History

-

April 18, 2017

April 18^th is a very significant date in aviation history. There is a lot to cover so stay with us…

In 1917, William Edward Boeing renamed his Pacific Aero Products company, calling it The Boeing Airplane Company. Boeing’s company would go on to design and build some of the most important military and civilian aircraft the world has ever known. Think of a world without the Boeing Stearman trainer, B-17 Flying Fortress, the B-29 Superfortress, the B-52 Stratofortress, the CH-46 Sea Knight or the CH-47 Chinook, the C-135 / KC-135 series of military transports, electronic warfare aircraft, and tankers, the C-17 Globemaster III, and many more…or the 707, 727, 737, 747, 757, 767, 777…you get the point.

[youtube id=”p9gAcqGLcQ4″ width=”800″ height=”454″ position=”left”]

In 1918, Frederick Bock was born. US Army Air Forces (USAAF) Captain Frederick Bock would later command the B-29 Superfortress bomber “The Great Artiste” on August 9^th 1945. Major Charles Sweeney commanded Bock’s usual aircraft, “Bock’s Car”, Air Force serial number 44-27297, which dropped the second atomic bomb on Nagasaki that day in 1945. “Bock’s Car” is now displayed at the National Museum of the US Air Force. Few are aware just how close the mission came to failure at several points along the way.

[youtube id=”qGzta8n9zIk” width=”800″ height=”454″ position=”left”]

Also in 1942, Colonel James Doolittle launched first from the storm-lashed deck of the aircraft carrier USS Hornet (CV-8) in company with 15 other B-25B Mitchell bombers to attack the Japanese home islands for the first time. Detected by Japanese picket boats while still more than 200 miles from their intended launch point, Doolittle and the captain of the Hornet (Marc Mitscher) decided to launch the raiders immediately after the task force was discovered. You know the rest of the story. Today is the 75^th anniversary of the Doolittle Tokyo raid. The last living participant, Doolittle’s co-pilot Richard Cole, is being honored by the Air Force as you read this.

[youtube id=”J9sWwJSm96E” width=”800″ height=”454″ position=”left”]

A year to the day later, in 1943, United States Army Air Forces (USAAF) pilots flying P-38G Lightnings executed Operation Vengeance, the interception and destruction of the Mitsubishi G4M Betty bomber carrying Japanese Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto over Bougainville in the Solomons Islands. Yamamoto had planned the Japanese attacks on Pearl Harbor and many of the other initial Japanese offensives of the war. The P-38G pilots were from the 339^th Fighter Squadron of the 347^th Fighter Group. Controversy over the identity of the pilot who actually shot Yamamoto’s plane down persisted for many years after the mission was completed.

[youtube id=”fKvJgFldgGA” width=”800″ height=”454″ position=”left”]

In 1952, the Convair YB-60, a converted B-36F Peacemaker with swept wings, tail stabilizers, and eight Pratt & Whitney J57 turbojet engines mounted paired in four pods, flew for the first time. Intended to compete for a United States Air Force (USAF) contract against the Boeing B-52 Stratofortress, the YB-60 was less expensive but also far less capable than the Boeing design. The YB-60 was the largest jet powered bomber ever built.

[youtube id=”fFWH8aaQkmk” width=”800″ height=”454″ position=”left”]

In 1957, three Boeing B-52B Stratofortresses from the USAF 93^rd Bombardment Wing completed the first circumnavigation of the world in 45 hours and 19 minutes for Operation Power Flight. Having been in service with Strategic Air Command (SAC) for only a few months at the time of the record-setting flight, the B-52 was doing things that no other jet-powered bomber in the world could do, and ensuring that the entire world knew it. That was on component of deterrence.

In 1958, a Grumman F11F-1 Tiger, piloted by US Navy Lieutenant Commander George Watkins, rose from Edwards Air Force Base in California to a new world altitude record of 76,933 feet. The Tiger was the first Grumman fighter that was capable of supersonic speeds in level flight. It was handicapped by the available engine technology when it was introduced and, in a word, timing. The Tiger was competing against the Vought F-8 Crusader and the McDonnell F-4 Phantom II.

In 1973, the USAF announced that the Fairchild (Republic) YA-10 had won the A-X fly-off against the Northrop YA-9. The competition started with a USAF request for proposal (RFP) in May of 1970 for a low-cost, survivable airframe to be used primarily for ground attack. We all know how that one turned out. Like the B-52, there is no suitable replacement for the A-10 Thunderbolt II.

[youtube id=”qRsor-m9CB4″ width=”800″ height=”454″ position=”left”]

In 1988, as part of what was called the “Tanker War”, the US Navy took retaliatory action against Iranian Naval forces and facilities in the Persian Gulf as part of Operation Praying Mantis. An Iranian mine had heavily damaged the Navy Guided Missile Frigate USS Samuel B Roberts (FFG-58). VA-95 Green Lizards A-6E Intruders from the aircraft carrier USS Enterprise (CVN-65) sank or damaged several Iranian Navy ships and small craft. Other naval aircraft attacked Iranian targets supporting mining operations in the Gulf.

In 1991 Eastern Airlines was dissolved after 64 years in operation. Eastern was the first airline to fly the Boeing 727 and 757 passenger airliners, and the first US carrier to fly the Airbus A300. In 1938 World War I flying ace Eddie Rickenbacker bought Eastern from General Motors and quickly grew it into the most profitable airline in the country. I n 2011 Eastern was reborn as a charter airline.

[youtube id=”Q-1-rEtxl5E” width=”800″ height=”454″ position=”left”]

Only The Space Shuttle ‘flew’ Faster Than This Rocket Plane Designed With A Slide Rule

-

April 16, 2017

Today’s retrospective is the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) film “Research Project X-15.” Shot during the mid-1960s at various NASA locations and Edward Air Force Base (AFB) in California, the film highlights the development of not only the X-15, but several of the other previous X planes as well. Interviews with designers, builders, and pilots highlight the narrative history of a program that peeled back the mysteries needing to be solved in order to explore space and visit the moon. Flown by well-known test pilots like Neil Armstrong, Scott Crossfield, Joe Walker, and Pete Knight on 199 total missions, the X-15 was a program far ahead of its time in many ways.

Only The Space Shuttle 'flew' Faster Than This Rocket Plane Designed With A Slide Rule 50 — NASA X-15 carried by the NB-52B mothership 52-008 The Challenger and a T-38 Talon chase plane alongside.

Featured prominently in the film are the B-52 motherships The High and Mighty One (NB-52A Air Force serial number 52-003- Balls 3) and The Challenger (NB-52B Air Force serial number 52-008- Balls 8). 52-003 was retired in 1969 and can now be viewed at the Pima County Air Museum in Tucson, Arizona. 52-008 remained in service supporting NASA and private space initiatives until December 17^th 2004, when the venerable aircraft was retired to gate guard duty at Edwards AFB and replaced by a slightly younger, but far less experienced, B-52H mothership.

Only The Space Shuttle 'flew' Faster Than This Rocket Plane Designed With A Slide Rule 51 — X-15A2 (Air Force serial number 56-6671) with external fuel tanks fitted.

The three X-15s were flown to investigate high-speed, high-altitude flight characteristics between June of 1959 and October of 1968. X-15s set world speed records of Mach 6.7 and altitude records of 354,200 feet. Those speed and altitude records stood for almost 40 years. Information gained from the highly successful X-15 program contributed to development of the NASA Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, and Space Shuttle manned space flight programs, as well as development of materials and systems used in high-speed high-altitude aircraft designed and built after the program came to its conclusion. Other programs followed the X-15 but for sheer envelope-pushing the X-15 Research Project was unmatched before or since.

[youtube id=”WSEywbqi5ps” width=”800″ height=”454″ position=”left”]

Delta Air Lines Flight Museum Soars In Its Growing Popularity

History

Charles Atkeison

-

April 14, 2017