EA-18G "Growler"

Owl,

Si. The many targets per one jet thing made jets with more bombs (e.g. BUF)
more attractive to ABCCC dudes.

The A-6 was used very handily in the shore-base expeditionary role in DS.
In fact, I seem to remember photos of USMC squadrons loaded with 10 x 82¹s
and 12 x Mk-20¹s. IMHO the 28-bomb loadout was almost a ³ferry tail² given
that at least one drop tank was required for on station time‹at least in my
experience.

I¹m fairly sure the 500 lb JDAM has IOC¹ed (GBU-38). I haven¹t seen one yet
personally though. Good for Harriers mostly... And any other strike
platform that is concerned about CD.

--Woody

On 11/14/05 1:02 PM, in article
, "Mike Kanze"
wrote:

Woody,

It goes almost without saying that one of the Drumstick's finest attributes
was as a carrier-capable long-legged flying dump truck.

And playing the "what might have been" along with you, the switch to weps that
give platforms "targets per sortie" capabilities (versus the "sorties per
target" days of the VN war) would further magnify the "dump truck" honorific.

With the air attack emphasis in the current conflict moving increasingly
toward smaller, high-accuracy weps (take out the shed in the back of the third
house in the block, instead of the entire block), the potential A-6 loadout
approaches the old 28 weps-on-5-MERS configuration (and your FAC(A) scenario,
minus the comparatively-inaccurate rockets). Further, this hypothetical begs
the reintroduction of the A-6 into a USMC-style shore-based expeditionary
usage. With no need to lug to/from the boat, more drop tanks are switched out
for MERs.

Certainly a change from the days of "take out the center tank in the first row
of the POL complex" and pray that your system didn't go squirrelly, taking
your run over Uncle Ho's Happy Peoples' Convalescent Hospital & SAM Warehouse,
or some other McNamara-forbidden target.

ISTR that a MK82 JDAM is in the works, or maybe already deployed, n'est-ce
pas?

EA-18G "Growler"Woody,

IMHO the 28-bomb loadout was almost a "ferry tail" given that at least one drop tank was required for on station time-at least in my experience.

True...or lots of "give" available overhead. (My head is still locked in the Days of Wine and Roses, when each cycle had at least one EKA-3 and one or two A-6 duty tankers in orbit.)

******

Nasty crack that circulated in the early 1970s, just as the EA-6Bs were about to make their first sea deployment, was one that asked how much "give" they could offer. On at least one occasion, this sort of comment came from a "heavy" who had never taken the time to notice that the EA-6B was an electron-chaser by design, and not a hypermorph like the Whale had become.

And now it appears we are coming full-circle, with the Growler being the new hypermorph.

--
Mike Kanze

"There's no such thing as a soul. It's just something they made up to scare kids, like the boogeyman or Michael Jackson."

- Bart Simpson


"Doug "Woody" and Erin Beal" wrote in message ...
Owl,

Si. The many targets per one jet thing made jets with more bombs (e.g. BUF) more attractive to ABCCC dudes.

The A-6 was used very handily in the shore-base expeditionary role in DS. In fact, I seem to remember photos of USMC squadrons loaded with 10 x 82's and 12 x Mk-20's. IMHO the 28-bomb loadout was almost a "ferry tail" given that at least one drop tank was required for on station time-at least in my experience.

I'm fairly sure the 500 lb JDAM has IOC'ed (GBU-38). I haven't seen one yet personally though. Good for Harriers mostly... And any other strike platform that is concerned about CD.

--Woody

On 11/14/05 1:02 PM, in article , "Mike Kanze" wrote:


Woody,

It goes almost without saying that one of the Drumstick's finest attributes was as a carrier-capable long-legged flying dump truck.

And playing the "what might have been" along with you, the switch to weps that give platforms "targets per sortie" capabilities (versus the "sorties per target" days of the VN war) would further magnify the "dump truck" honorific.

With the air attack emphasis in the current conflict moving increasingly toward smaller, high-accuracy weps (take out the shed in the back of the third house in the block, instead of the entire block), the potential A-6 loadout approaches the old 28 weps-on-5-MERS configuration (and your FAC(A) scenario, minus the comparatively-inaccurate rockets). Further, this hypothetical begs the reintroduction of the A-6 into a USMC-style shore-based expeditionary usage. With no need to lug to/from the boat, more drop tanks are switched out for MERs.

Certainly a change from the days of "take out the center tank in the first row of the POL complex" and pray that your system didn't go squirrelly, taking your run over Uncle Ho's Happy Peoples' Convalescent Hospital & SAM Warehouse, or some other McNamara-forbidden target.

ISTR that a MK82 JDAM is in the works, or maybe already deployed, n'est-ce pas?

.... And that myth kept perpetuating. There were a few guys at China Lake
that were trying to plumb the Prowler for a Buddy Store. According to a
couple of mechs I used to socialize with, it was an O-level mod.

My contention (like yours) was that the Prowler was MUCH too valuable to be
relegated to tanker duty.

Now the P-3 on the other hand...

--Woody

On 11/15/05 1:20 PM, in article
, "Mike Kanze"
wrote:

Nasty crack that circulated in the early 1970s, just as the EA-6Bs were about
to make their first sea deployment, was one that asked how much "give" they
could offer. On at least one occasion, this sort of comment came from a
"heavy" who had never taken the time to notice that the EA-6B was an
electron-chaser by design, and not a hypermorph like the Whale had become.

And now it appears we are coming full-circle, with the Growler being the new
hypermorph.

On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 12:13:53 GMT, "Doug \"Woody\" and Erin Beal"
wrote:

My contention (like yours) was that the Prowler was MUCH too valuable to be
relegated to tanker duty.

Now the P-3 on the other hand...

Hey, all you have to do is fit a hook and figure out how to fold the
wings!!!!! ;-)

Bill Kambic

Bill,

Not quite so simple.

First you have to wean the VP community from per-diem. Only when you have been successful in this can you consider the investment in airframe mods.

--
Mike Kanze

"There's no such thing as a soul. It's just something they made up to scare kids, like the boogeyman or Michael Jackson."

- Bart Simpson


wrote in message ...
On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 12:13:53 GMT, "Doug \"Woody\" and Erin Beal"
wrote:

My contention (like yours) was that the Prowler was MUCH too valuable to be
relegated to tanker duty.

Now the P-3 on the other hand...

Hey, all you have to do is fit a hook and figure out how to fold the
wings!!!!! ;-)

Bill Kambic

On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 12:20:28 -0800, "Mike Kanze"
wrote:

Bill,

Not quite so simple.

First you have to wean the VP community from per-diem.

making the Sign of the Cross Get thee behind me,
Satan!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ;-)

Only when you have been successful in this can you consider the investment in airframe mods.

Well, OK, as long we don't have to give up the galley.

Bill Kambic

Mike Kanze wrote:
EA-18G "Growler"Woody,

IMHO the 28-bomb loadout was almost a "ferry tail" given that at least one drop tank was required for on station time-at least in my experience.

True...or lots of "give" available overhead. (My head is still locked in the Days of Wine and Roses, when each cycle had at least one EKA-3 and one or two A-6 duty tankers in orbit.)

******

Nasty crack that circulated in the early 1970s, just as the EA-6Bs were about to make their first sea deployment, was one that asked how much "give" they could offer. On at least one occasion, this sort of comment came from a "heavy" who had never taken the time to notice that the EA-6B was an electron-chaser by design, and not a hypermorph like the Whale had become.

And now it appears we are coming full-circle, with the Growler being the new hypermorph.

--
Mike Kanze

Speaking of hypermorphing...An interesting article in the Sept. 2005
Proceedings, "Creatively Bridging the Gap" by Captain Gordon E. Van
Hook, USN, and Captain Thomas C. Cropper, USN, declares that the
APS-130 on the EA-6B makes it useful in an ASW/SSSC role (like it's not
tasked in too many roles already). Also, "Every aircraft in CVW-11 is
an ASW aircraft".

Same as what happened in the mid-1970s, when we migrated to the CV deck (from the split CVA / CVS dedicated decks). Among other taskings was that the A-6s would become secondary SSSC platforms, and the primary delivery platform for the later-cancelled CAPTOR (encapsulated torpedo) weapon.

Deja-vu all over again.

--
Mike Kanze

"Lisa, if you don't like your job you don't strike. You just go in every day and do it really half-assed. That's the American way."

-- Homer Simpson

wrote in message oups.com...
Mike Kanze wrote:
EA-18G "Growler"Woody,

IMHO the 28-bomb loadout was almost a "ferry tail" given that at least one drop tank was required for on station time-at least in my experience.

True...or lots of "give" available overhead. (My head is still locked in the Days of Wine and Roses, when each cycle had at least one EKA-3 and one or two A-6 duty tankers in orbit.)

******

Nasty crack that circulated in the early 1970s, just as the EA-6Bs were about to make their first sea deployment, was one that asked how much "give" they could offer. On at least one occasion, this sort of comment came from a "heavy" who had never taken the time to notice that the EA-6B was an electron-chaser by design, and not a hypermorph like the Whale had become.

And now it appears we are coming full-circle, with the Growler being the new hypermorph.

--
Mike Kanze

Speaking of hypermorphing...An interesting article in the Sept. 2005
Proceedings, "Creatively Bridging the Gap" by Captain Gordon E. Van
Hook, USN, and Captain Thomas C. Cropper, USN, declares that the
APS-130 on the EA-6B makes it useful in an ASW/SSSC role (like it's not
tasked in too many roles already). Also, "Every aircraft in CVW-11 is
an ASW aircraft".

Mike Kanze wrote:
Same as what happened in the mid-1970s, when we migrated to the CV deck
(from the split CVA / CVS dedicated decks). Among other taskings was
that the A-6s would become secondary SSSC platforms, and the primary
delivery platform for the later-cancelled CAPTOR (encapsulated torpedo)
weapon.

Regarding CAPTOR, "later canceled" must mean "served for more than 20
years and was retired". CAPTOR was fielded in 1979 and phased out
around 2002.

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

Tom,

I had heard otherwise, but then I've been gone from the Canoe Club for 30 years now. Thanks for the correction.

--
Mike Kanze

"Lisa, if you don't like your job you don't strike. You just go in every day and do it really half-assed. That's the American way."

-- Homer Simpson

"Thomas Schoene" wrote in message k.net...
Mike Kanze wrote:
Same as what happened in the mid-1970s, when we migrated to the CV deck
(from the split CVA / CVS dedicated decks). Among other taskings was
that the A-6s would become secondary SSSC platforms, and the primary
delivery platform for the later-cancelled CAPTOR (encapsulated torpedo)
weapon.

Regarding CAPTOR, "later canceled" must mean "served for more than 20
years and was retired". CAPTOR was fielded in 1979 and phased out
around 2002.

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