A-4 / A-7 Question

In article ,
Michael Williamson writes:
Alan Minyard wrote:
On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 17:13:32 GMT, Douglas Berry wrote:


I suppose he could have seen some transient P-61s ?

Al Minyard

Based on a mention of F-82s in service at the time, I'd guess that
a flight of F-82s (night/all weather types, with the central radar
pod) might have been mistaken for P-38s. Two booms, with a central
pod might be mistaken for a P-38 in the right circumstances, given
the similar planforms.

The F-61s were pretty much gone by 1949-1950 - I think the last
operational ones ended up being scrapped in place in the Philippines
at that time. The F-82s didn't last much beyond 1953 - the last ones
were F-82Hs modified for Arctic conditions and plown in Alaska.
The F-82s wore out pretty fast - the V1710s that they used had pretty
much reached the peak of piston engine development, and were rather
highly stressed and tempremental critters. Due to teh postwar
cutbacks, there weren't many of them built. With the advent of the
Tu-4 and higher performing Soviet bombers, the Twin Mustangs were
dropped as soon as F-94s and F-89s became available. The Air National
Guard and Air Force Reserves never got any,

--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster

In article ,
says...
On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 17:13:32 GMT, Douglas Berry wrote:

Lo, many moons past, on Tue, 21 Oct 2003 02:59:44 GMT, a stranger
called by some Tank Fixer came
forth and told this tale in us.military.army

In article ,
says...

"Tank Fixer" wrote in message
k.net...

A 50 year old memory is nothing more than that.

However research in the records has show you to be incorrect.

What the records have shown is that there is many records that don't quite
agree. They disagree by a couple of years or so. If any historian were to
publish where they couldn't quite get the dates correct throughout their
accounting you would be the first to throw it out. But since you enjoy
following me around like a little puppy, I guess that doesn't apply here.

The ones from the USAF Office of History ?

You remember those folks ? The ons in you're former service paid to
document things and keep the history of the service ?

A friend of mine came uo with a possible solution. Matbe someone
threw a P-38 can opener at Daryl, hitiing him in the head and giving
him all sorts of delusions.

I suppose he could have seen some transient P-61s ?



I was thinking F-82's myself.

When did they leave Air Guard/Airforce reserve service ?


--
When dealing with propaganda terminology one sometimes always speaks in
variable absolutes. This is not to be mistaken for an unbiased slant.

(Harry Andreas) wrote in message ...
SNIP
The alternative is to spend a LOT of time training for dumb bomb
deliveries that you'll probably never do: a waste to resources when
you could be training for something more useful.
Or not train for dumb bomb deliveries enough, and if you have to do it,
not be competent enough which is a risk all it's own.
SNIP
I understand (never having flown the thing) an F16 with its ring laser
gyro INS, laser/radar(?) ranging and continuous computing bomb
computer can achieve quite amazing accuracy in dumb dive bombing,
circa 10m accuracies. This accuracy is obtained with substantially
less practice than with the old fixed reticle and 'that looks about
right' (TLAR) we had to use in the F4 and earlier jets. The A7 with
its continuous predicting bomb sight was also easier to use and more
accurate that the depressed reticle sight. Where the depressed reticle
really gave fits was with the first bomb dropped in high winds - an
aim-off point of 600 feet is damn hard to eyeball over targets without
that big white known-dimension circle around them. That also means in
one pass-haul ass areas with no known 'yardstick' down there hits
become more a matter of luck with the old TLAR and dumb sight. Yeah,
we had dive-toss, radar ranging and the INS with a bombing computer.
But one 'no release' in a hot area kind of puts you off dive toss
until you get back to Avon park FL. :/
Walt BJ

On 10/23/03 8:22 PM, in article
, "WaltBJ"
wrote:

(Harry Andreas) wrote in message
...
SNIP
The alternative is to spend a LOT of time training for dumb bomb
deliveries that you'll probably never do: a waste to resources when
you could be training for something more useful.
Or not train for dumb bomb deliveries enough, and if you have to do it,
not be competent enough which is a risk all it's own.
SNIP
I understand (never having flown the thing) an F16 with its ring laser
gyro INS, laser/radar(?) ranging and continuous computing bomb
computer can achieve quite amazing accuracy in dumb dive bombing,
circa 10m accuracies. This accuracy is obtained with substantially
less practice than with the old fixed reticle and 'that looks about
right' (TLAR) we had to use in the F4 and earlier jets. The A7 with
its continuous predicting bomb sight was also easier to use and more
accurate that the depressed reticle sight. Where the depressed reticle
really gave fits was with the first bomb dropped in high winds - an
aim-off point of 600 feet is damn hard to eyeball over targets without
that big white known-dimension circle around them. That also means in
one pass-haul ass areas with no known 'yardstick' down there hits
become more a matter of luck with the old TLAR and dumb sight. Yeah,
we had dive-toss, radar ranging and the INS with a bombing computer.
But one 'no release' in a hot area kind of puts you off dive toss
until you get back to Avon park FL. :/
Walt BJ

You're bringing back my A-6 memories. I have a lot of time on iron sights.
Don't miss it.

All valid points. Substantially less time training to dumb bomb deliveries
when it's so easy to get a good hit.

--Woody

"Doug "Woody" and Erin Beal" wrote...
SNIP
The alternative is to spend a LOT of time training for dumb bomb
deliveries that you'll probably never do: a waste to resources when
you could be training for something more useful.
Or not train for dumb bomb deliveries enough, and if you have to do it,
not be competent enough which is a risk all it's own.
SNIP
I understand (never having flown the thing) an F16 with its ring laser
gyro INS, laser/radar(?) ranging and continuous computing bomb
computer can achieve quite amazing accuracy in dumb dive bombing,
circa 10m accuracies.
SNIP
You're bringing back my A-6 memories. I have a lot of time on iron sights.
Don't miss it.

All valid points. Substantially less time training to dumb bomb deliveries
when it's so easy to get a good hit.

Since we have gotten to the time when aircraft systems are reliable enough to
count on in the short hairs, you have a valid point. HOWEVER, I believe it is
still a "good idea" for an air-to-mud pilot to understand the basic principles
behind what the computer is doing for him.

With about 1700 hours each in the A-4 and A-6, including an instructor tour in
the A-4, I've seen a lot of reasons in the past for a pilot to be able to "feel"
when the computer is about to do something bad -- like release a load of Mk 82s
a mile short of the target. I got to be really good at dive bombing from the
back seat of the TA-4, using the clock as a gunsight (no self-respecting SNA
would DARE to NOT hit the pickle when I said "Pickle," even if it did cost him a
beer). Later, when flying with newbie B/Ns (and an occasional weak "old guy")
in the A-6, I could often sense well ahead of time when things weren't going
quite right, and had to make use of the planned manual backup. Then there are
the times when rolling in for a CCIP or General Boresight attack, a press on the
Attack button decided to cause general hate & discontent in the computer, and a
quick slap of the gunsight button to Manual allowed a good hit in spite of it.

Then there's the case for "airmanship" and "air sense." Being proficient at
manual bombing means a pilot is proficient at detecting and correcting for
errors in real time, as well as getting himself to the proper point at the
proper time in the first place. Also, while the computer may make up for a
suboptimal delivery profile and get the bomb on target, it cannot make up for
the loss of Pk when the impact angle is suboptimal in a delivery against a hard
target.

Some of these considerations are no longer totally relevant when dropping a JDAM
from a Hornet, but when going back to CAS with dumb bombs, it's still "a good
thing" to be able to support your Grunt buddies even if the computer craps out
at the last minute. They may not have the luxury of waiting for the backup...

John,

I second your point about needing to understand the basic principles.

Later, when flying with newbie B/Ns (and an occasional weak "old guy") in
the A-6, I could often sense well ahead of time when things weren't going
quite right, and had to make use of the planned manual backup. Then there
are the times when rolling in for a CCIP or General Boresight attack, a
press on the Attack button decided to cause general hate & discontent in the
computer, and a quick slap of the gunsight button to Manual allowed a good
hit in spite of it.

Brings back many memories of the A-6A and its squirrelly AN/ASQ-61 computer.
In this machine that sense of "sense" you mentioned was often a lifesaver.
An experienced and coordinated pilot-B/N crew could often tell pretty
quickly how well the Q-61 was going to hold together, and (as you said)
would have a backup for the all-too-frequent times when things turned to
worms. (Most B/Ns of that era - myself included - had tighter degraded
system CEPs than full-system ones.)

The OB-16 low-level route (through the eastern Oregon canyons) was a good
test of the team and machine. How you both felt about the "tightness" of
the system determined how low into the canyons you went - if at all.

Owl sends.
--
Mike Kanze

"Owl", B/N
A-6A, A-6B (PAT ARM), KA-6D

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

650-726-7890

"Friends don't let friends take home ugly men."
- Women's restroom, Starboard, Dewey Beach, DE, USA

"Beauty is only a light switch away."
- Perkins Library, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA


"John R Weiss" wrote in message
news:ZQemb.18835$Fm2.9908@attbi_s04...
[snipped]