SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
Hey! I think there's a guy in Washington who wanted to buy Greenland. Make him an offer.
Why didn't Canada use F-106 Delta Dart?
- Thread starter Admiral Beez
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
swampyankee
Chief Master Sergeant
- 3,954
- Jun 25, 2013
Which makes absolute sense. I've even read articles stating that the USAF pilots were much more concerned about high-speed, high-altitude ejections than low-speed, low-altitude ejections, even though operational statistics showed that there were far more ejections at low altitude. I suspect this was because of their expectations for combat operations.
This was in part due to a USAF gospel of the time that successful egress below 500 feet AGL was a physical impossibility, no matter how fancy the technology, so Martin-Baker and USN pursuing zero-zero capability was a waste of resources chasing a pipe dream.
I suspect that the thinking at the time was that any war would be nuclear, over quickly, and losses would be deliberate expenditures and unrecoverable. How else do you explain sending B47s, B57s, and B45s on deep penetrations of USSR without the fuel to get back out again? One way ticket.
My chief pilot at the commuter airline enlisted in USAF as an Airman Recruit, retired as a bird Colonel, and commanded or crewed on every big bomber or tanker SAC had during his 28 years. I got the above info straight from the horse's mouth.
He was flying as a TSgt boomer on KC97s when he got his appointment to Air Cadet flight school and came back less than two years later to his old squadron as a 1stLt pilot. After that, it was B47, KC135, B52, and finally FB111, retiring as Stan/Eval Officer for the last remaining wing of FB111s. He said his CO tried to get him a BG promotion, but was denied as he was a mustang and not an Academy grad.
Cheers,
Wes
Last edited:
That was an interim: The idea ultimately was a jet-powered design.
GreenKnight121
Senior Airman
- 598
- Mar 16, 2014
The AJ Savage was the second "interim" design... it could (and did) land back on the carrier.
The first "interim carrier-based nuclear bomber" of the USN was the P2V-3C Neptune (12 converted). It had no folding wings, and no arresting gear. When it took off from the flight deck (with JATO assist) it was to fly its attack mission, and, IF fuel and enemy air defenses allowed, land on a friendly land airfield! Or to just bail out over relatively intact territory (hopefully friendly). The USN had 25 "Little Boy" type atomic bombs made just for this mission... it was the only atomic weapon in the US arsenal small enough to fit in the P2V!
Curtis LeMay & Co must have been laughing their asses off!
I bet carrier skippers just loved the prospect of having that white elephant monopolizing their flight deck, rendering all other flight ops impossible and their ship a sitting duck. It's a long voyage to any possible launch points.
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
When I was growing up in Sheepshead Bay, Brooklyn, Naval Air Station New York was in operation. They operated Neptunes. I would watch them fly out to sea from the shore. I watched them fly low overhead. I loved the sound they made. I could tell the Neptune from the KC-97 by sound alone (The A-4 wasn't even close.) The planes flying from "Floyd Bennett Field" got me interested in plane spotting. I loved watching them at night. Spotting them among the stars, I could see the blue exhaust flames. Just like Martin Caidin described in his books.
Thanks for bringing up the Neptune.
Thanks for bringing up the Neptune.
During Operation "Highjump" in 1947, USS Philippine Sea launched several P2V to be used for Antarctic surveying from the base "Little America IV". If I remember correctly, as the planes were equipped wth ski undercarriages, the flight deck of the carrier had to be covered in ice for them to be able to take off. I also think they used JATOs.
Correction - I misremembered. The planes launched from the carrier were R4Ds (C-47s for non-Navy). The P2Vs flew directly from Argentina during a later expedition.
Correction - I misremembered. The planes launched from the carrier were R4Ds (C-47s for non-Navy). The P2Vs flew directly from Argentina during a later expedition.
Last edited:
swampyankee
Chief Master Sergeant
- 3,954
- Jun 25, 2013
Denmark may take offense.
"So what? We're bigger than they are! Besides, they're socialists, so who cares what they think?"
swampyankee
Chief Master Sergeant
- 3,954
- Jun 25, 2013
They were probably enraged at the idea of somebody else having aircraft. Or, for that matter, a budget.
Correct, the P2V was the first, but it couldn't land after it took off. The AJ could do that.
The USN actually wanted a new jet-bomber that was expected to weigh 100,000 pounds while able to carry up to 12000 pounds of ordinance, including a nuclear warhead. The weight figures were based around the range requirements and structural requirements (there might have been an interest in having a normal rated g-load ranging from 4-5g), and the presumption that the aircraft's wingspan would be the same as the P2V.
The wingspan issue might have been the straw that broke the camel's back. It resulted in the decision for a flush-decked carrier, which made it difficult to mount radar effectively. As a result, the decision was made to produce a command ship that would relay data to the carrier instead of having radar systems of its own.
Glad that didn't happen! Can you imagine cycling that monster on and off the boat? As it was, the A3D and A3J at roughly 3/4 of that launch-land energy taxed the catapults and arresting gear right to their limits.
Last edited:
Yeah, but the USS United States (CVA-58) would have been designed to handle that.
That said, the carrier was idiotic in design.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
So now we get to ask questions - WHY?
To the best of my knowledge, the design didn't have radar onboard, and depended on data fed to it by a command ship or other vessels. Since other carriers had their own radar onboard, that is kind of a major problem and, if the command ship gets damaged or sunk, the carrier is blind.
This had to do with the fact that the carrier was designed with a flush-deck, and that had to do with the presumption that the aircraft would have a wingspan the same as the P2V Neptune. This is something that didn't appear to have been necessary.
This "elephant boat" would almost certainly turn out to be a single mission one trick pony. Unless it had gargantuan elevators and hangar decks, its massive nuke bombers would have to live topside full time, making it logistically impractical to host any additional aircraft types. Thus it would depend on other carriers to provide interception, CAP, AEW, conventional strike, and ASW functions, as well as defensive AAA and SAM direction. Can you spell B_O_O_N_D_O_G_G_L_E?
Money better spent on B52s and KC135s, much as an old squid like me hates to admit it.
Cheers,
Wes
Last edited:
Thanks to Ed (Simplicate & Add Lightness) Heinneman, who came up with a less ponderous solution in the A3D.
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
Did Ed Heinneman have a hand in the TBF? My "what if" is, a stripped down torpedo plane like the AD1 instead of the TBF. Maybe that's for a different thread.
