New Queer? for the fleet, EF-18G

Good comments Pugs,
However my kind of smart ass remarks about the 60-400Hz range had
nothing to do with lo-band jammers in the lower MHz range, maybe you
missed that, sorry.
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 11:33:12 -0500, Allen Epps
wrote:

In article , fudog50
wrote:

The ranges in the cascades and olympics maybe??? Also, the
ALQ-99 support??? CVWP maybe??? You mentioned a "whole lot of other
reasons", which there are many. I think the biggest competition on the
west coast would be Lemoore of course, but I've heard about the noise
complaints and lack of hangar space there. Yes, there are noise issues
in Whidbey, I had to sign sort of a waiver when I bought my house
there 10 years ago that I knew I was in a certain noise area.. But I
know from experience here at the Lake and up at Whidbey, that the
400's are quieter than those 408 A/B's. It all depends which
politico's go for it the most I suppose.
I only hope from a logistics standpoint that they decide to
base it on both coasts. As a prior Prowler MMCO, it is very painful
and expensive to move 5 jets and 155 personnel plus all the support
items necessary cross country every deck cert, TESTA 1/2, TESTA 3/4,
COMPTUEX and JTFEX, just like the Tomcat guys have to do going east to
west. And very expensive.


I think AlQ-99 support is pretty small potatos in the cost issue. None
of this will happen quickly so NUW will be around for awhile. I think
the issue will come down to training airspace. The Oly, Okanoagan and
Roosevelt MOA's and the Darrington Special Use airspace are simply not
available elswhere not to mention the IR and VR routes. If they don't
get used we will lose then and getting them back won't be an option.
The airspace at Fallon, Lemore, W-72, Key Weird and such are pretty
saturated let alone buildings, noise and all the other issues.

With regard to EMI and your comment about low band pods VAQ-35 did, in
fact, have two A/B band pods which went down into the low 200 MHZ range
and up to 1090MHZ IIRC. They were FIWC (aka FEWSG aka FTRG) assets and
were 0-3G limited and flared landings only. They were built on a low
band 99 pod and canoe and externally looked like every other low band
pod.

Pugs

In article , fudog50
wrote:

Good comments Pugs,
However my kind of smart ass remarks about the 60-400Hz range had
nothing to do with lo-band jammers in the lower MHz range, maybe you
missed that, sorry.
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 11:33:12 -0500, Allen Epps
wrote:

foo,
Sorry brain addled by work, I added an M to the Hz and synapses long
dormant snapped to life recalling the halceon days of doing the FIWC
thing before I registered sarcasm.
I just saw my my "Tan, Drink, Fly" patch from VAQ-35 with an
embroidered Prowler front end with fishing rods, skies and golf bags
stuffed in the back. I was in 35 for 19 months before going TAR as the
squadron was closing down and in that time went on 27 detachments. Got
a hell of a lot more flight time than most of the fleet Prowler guys in
the 93 timeframe. I had four months in a row with more than 60 hours a
month, of course I was also the Scheds "O" We had 11 airframes (2
were dead birds) and maint could often get 6 flyable with five crews in
the squadorn. Everyone was second tour Prowlers at least until the
women and a couple other guys came aboard so tons of experience and a
bunch of good folks.
Pugs