Consistent CAP over a fleet from a land base

David Brower wrote:
Tank Fixer writes:

In article ,
on Tue, 7 Feb 2006 17:14:28 +0000 (UTC),
Taki Kogoma attempted to say .....

On Tue, 07 Feb 2006 03:49:08 GMT,
allegedly declared to sci.military.naval...
In article .com,
on 6 Feb 2006 08:29:33 -0800,
Douglas Eagleson attempted to say .....
A fighter specially designed for fleet defense was my comment.

You mean the F-14 then ....?

Nah. F-111...

Say, what was that straight wing predecessor of the F111 that didnt get built ?

The F6D Missileer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F6D_Missileer

-dB

I vaguely remember a proposal to arm A-6 Intruder with AIM-54 Phoenix.
Probably it was mentioned in "Grumman A-6 Intruder: WarbirdTech Volume
33".

KDR wrote:

I vaguely remember a proposal to arm A-6 Intruder with AIM-54 Phoenix.
Probably it was mentioned in "Grumman A-6 Intruder: WarbirdTech Volume
33".

That I don't recall. The A-6F or G (or maybe both) had provision for
AMRAAM, but not Phoenix.


--
Tom Schoene lid
To email me, replace "invalid" with "net"

Thomas Schoene wrote:
KDR wrote:

I vaguely remember a proposal to arm A-6 Intruder with AIM-54 Phoenix.
Probably it was mentioned in "Grumman A-6 Intruder: WarbirdTech Volume
33".

That I don't recall. The A-6F or G (or maybe both) had provision for
AMRAAM, but not Phoenix.


--
Tom Schoene lid
To email me, replace "invalid" with "net"

Yes I know about the A-6F/G with AMRAAM. But what I saw in that
WarbirdTech book was not about AMRAAM. IIRC, the proposal was made
before the F nad G models.

Somewhat off-topic, but there was proposed at one time a single-seat variant of the A-6. IIRC, this one lost out early on to the A-7. There is a concept illustration of it somewhere on the web, but I no longer have the URL.

If you thought the A-6 looked slightly weird, this critter looked doubly so.

--
Mike Kanze

"If you're in the Army, it doesn't matter...you have no soul, being a brainwashed killer."

(I was told this by a very earnest young woman in Berkeley the other day. The look on her face when I asked why she was risking life and limb by angering a soulless killer was worth the lecture.)

-- Douglas Berry

"Thomas Schoene" wrote in message link.net...
KDR wrote:

I vaguely remember a proposal to arm A-6 Intruder with AIM-54 Phoenix.
Probably it was mentioned in "Grumman A-6 Intruder: WarbirdTech Volume
33".

That I don't recall. The A-6F or G (or maybe both) had provision for
AMRAAM, but not Phoenix.


--
Tom Schoene lid
To email me, replace "invalid" with "net"

"Mike Kanze" wrote in message . ..
Somewhat off-topic, but there was proposed at one time a single-seat variant of the A-6. IIRC, this one lost out early on to the A-7. There is a concept illustration of it somewhere on the web, but I no longer have the URL.

If you thought the A-6 looked slightly weird, this critter looked doubly so.

Before it received the designation "A6", the original bird emerged from Grumman's drawing boards with another name, A2F, IIRC, under the old designation pattern. Along with a different designator the proposal (and maybe the prototype) arrived with what were intended to be vectored thrust nozzles for the exhausts of its twin engines.

The company already had a history with twins for the Navy, the XF5F-1 (actually flown in cartoon combat by a famous comic squadron, notable for a nose which didn't quite extend to the wing's leading edge), the F7F, a sleek fuselage mated to two big radials, and the S2F "Stoof", stubbier than sleek, with its stablemate, the "commuter" airliner, the C1A.

The original A2F-1 / A-6A design is not what I was referring to earlier.

The single-cockpit "A-6" was a design based upon the already (at that time) in-existence A-6 airframe. The Iron Works folks basically tried to save time by building upon something already flying about the place.

--
Mike Kanze

436 Greenbrier Road
Half Moon Bay, California 94019-2259
USA

650-726-7890

"If you're in the Army, it doesn't matter...you have no soul, being a brainwashed killer."

(I was told this by a very earnest young woman in Berkeley the other day. The look on her face when I asked why she was risking life and limb by angering a soulless killer was worth the lecture.)

-- Douglas Berry

"TOliver" wrote in message ...

"Mike Kanze" wrote in message . ..
Somewhat off-topic, but there was proposed at one time a single-seat variant of the A-6. IIRC, this one lost out early on to the A-7. There is a concept illustration of it somewhere on the web, but I no longer have the URL.

If you thought the A-6 looked slightly weird, this critter looked doubly so.

Before it received the designation "A6", the original bird emerged from Grumman's drawing boards with another name, A2F, IIRC, under the old designation pattern. Along with a different designator the proposal (and maybe the prototype) arrived with what were intended to be vectored thrust nozzles for the exhausts of its twin engines.

The company already had a history with twins for the Navy, the XF5F-1 (actually flown in cartoon combat by a famous comic squadron, notable for a nose which didn't quite extend to the wing's leading edge), the F7F, a sleek fuselage mated to two big radials, and the S2F "Stoof", stubbier than sleek, with its stablemate, the "commuter" airliner, the C1A.

Mike Kanze wrote:
The original A2F-1 / A-6A design is not what I was referring to earlier.

The single-cockpit "A-6" was a design based upon the already (at that
time) in-existence A-6 airframe. The Iron Works folks basically tried to
save time by building upon something already flying about the place.

That light-attack competition actually required that the competitors be
based on existing designs, so they got a Super A-4, a Single-Seat A-6,
and a Scrunched F-8 (aka the A-7). Funny how the A-7 won, as it was
probably the one with the least actual relationship with its notional
ancestor. I don't know if there are any structural elements in common
between the A-7 and the F-8.

Sound familiar? The Navy does this a lot.

--
Tom Schoene lid
To email me, replace "invalid" with "net"

TOliver wrote:


"Mike Kanze"
wrote in message . ..
Somewhat off-topic, but there was proposed at one time a single-seat
variant of the A-6. IIRC, this one lost out early on to the A-7.
There is a concept illustration of it somewhere on the web, but I no
longer have the URL.

If you thought the A-6 looked slightly weird, this critter looked
doubly so.
Before it received the designation "A6", the original bird emerged
from Grumman's drawing boards with another name, A2F, IIRC, under
the old designation pattern. Along with a different designator the
proposal (and maybe the prototype) arrived with what were intended
to be vectored thrust nozzles for the exhausts of its twin engines.

The company already had a history with twins for the Navy, the
XF5F-1 (actually flown in cartoon combat by a famous comic squadron,
notable for a nose which didn't quite extend to the wing's leading
edge), the F7F, a sleek fuselage mated to two big radials, and the
S2F "Stoof", stubbier than sleek, with its stablemate, the
"commuter" airliner, the C1A.

Speaking of stablemates, how could you fail to mention the most
elegantly graceful and aesthetically pleasing Grumman product ever
built, the W2F Fudd?

The Tracker, the Trader and the Tracer, three different versions of two
T-28's welded to a dumpster.

But I did see a video of a beautiful Stoof working on a California
brushfire last week.

Rick

On Fri, 10 Feb 2006 10:47:22 -0800, Yofuri
wrote:

Speaking of stablemates, how could you fail to mention the most
elegantly graceful and aesthetically pleasing Grumman product ever
built, the W2F Fudd?

The Tracker, the Trader and the Tracer, three different versions of two
T-28's welded to a dumpster.

HEY!!!!!!!!!! I resemble that remark!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :-)

But I did see a video of a beautiful Stoof working on a California
brushfire last week.

The Brazilian AF runs a half dozen or so McKinnon coversion S2s. I
don't know if operate off thier carrier, though.

Bill Kambic

VS-27, VS-30, VS-73
Bill Kambic
Haras Lucero, Kingston, TN
Mangalarga Marchador: Uma Raça, Uma Paixão

Mike Kanze wrote:
Somewhat off-topic, but there was proposed at one time a single-seat variant of the A-6. IIRC, this one lost out early on to the A-7. There is a concept illustration of it somewhere on the web, but I no longer have the URL.

If you thought the A-6 looked slightly weird, this critter looked doubly so.

Is this the one you are refering to?

http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=19797