The Airplane Thread

[Llarry]

Originally Posted by Llarry

The workhorse Navy/Marine attack Grumman A-6 Intruder was getting long in the tooth and planning began for a replacement.

I skipped a minor footnote in my A-12 post. As the light attack A-7E was retired from Navy attack squadrons and the medium attack A-6E was getting old -- and before the A-12 project heated up -- the Navy and Grumman worked on an updated A-6 Intruder. They gave the A-6E new turbofan engines for increased thrust and lower fuel consumption and new radar and other avionics and called the result the A-6F. A few were tested, but the A-6F was abandoned for the more advanced and stealthy A-12.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grumman_A-6_Intruder

[Lady Jane]

Originally Posted by Llarry

The result was the last Navy/Marine attack aircraft to be contracted: The McDonnell Douglas A-12 Avenger II.

I'm just wondering how much computation power it would have taken to keep this wing flying.

[vreihen16]

Originally Posted by Lady Jane

I'm just wondering how much computation power it would have taken to keep this wing flying.

Probably not much more than the Apollo Guidance Computer could provide, since it was used on the first fly-by-wire tests in the 1970's using an F-8 Crusader:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo...outside_Apollo

Interesting tidbit from the Neil Armstrong "First Flights" TV series, in the episode about flight controls from wing-warping to fly-by-wire. It was an interesting twist to make Armstrong have to stand next to that plane with an Apollo DSKY control panel visible.....




.

[vreihen16]

Speaking of the Armstrong TV series, seasons 1 and 3 are available on Freevee at no charge. Season 2 is apparently only available on Amazon, at $10.99 for the season. I finished the others, but have not paid for season 2 yet.....

[Llarry]

From 1962 to 1991, the aircraft carrier USS Lexington (CVS/CVT/AVT 16) was based in Pensacola, Florida, and served to train future naval aviators in carrier landings and catapult takeoffs. The Lexington had already amassed a great record as a combat carrier in World War II and an attack carrier in the 1950s before being designated as the U.S. Navy's training carrier. For almost thirty years, thousands of student pilots got their first taste of carrier operations aboard Lexington. She was retired without replacement and now student aviators train using available large-deck carriers in the Atlantic.

The former USS Lexington now serves as a museum ship in Corpus Christi, Texas.

[vreihen16]

American Airlines 777 "arrival" at London Heathrow during this week's storm:

.

[Llarry]

As readers of the airplane thread know, I've covered a lot of U.S. Navy and Marine Corps airplane history. Here's one I don't think I've covered except tangentially: The electronic warfare (EW) aircraft.

Electronic warfare is tied inexorably to radar. There was quite the "wizard war", as it was called by some, in the European theatre in World War II as both the UK and Germany had advanced technology systems using radio/radar. The Pacific theatre, where the U.S. Navy concentrated their efforts, was quite different as the Japanese developed radar somewhat later.

Early Navy EW was very much a shoestring operation; the first detection of Japanese air search radar was in the Aleutians by Navy EW gear installed on an Army Air Forces B-17 bomber, if memory serves. Once it was confirmed that the Japanese were using radar, the effort became a bit more serious.

The first EW aircraft were rather homemade affairs and used the ever-versatile torpedo bomber: The Grumman TBF or Eastern TBM. The TBF/TBM was large enough to accommodate an extra crew member and a small amount of EW equipment. Late in the war, the configuration was formalized as the TBM-3Q; the Q stood for EW or electronic countermeasures (ECM). A TBM-3Q could only be externally distinguished from the garden variety TBM by a few antennas and I'm unable to find a decent photo: The attached TBM-3E photo is very close in appearance.

The versatile Douglas AD Skyraider that entered the fleet shortly after the end of World War II was soon recognized to be roomy enough for other than strictly attack purposes. Though originally a single seat aircraft, two EW operators were soon squeezed into a compartment behind and below the pilot. There was a small door on the right side of the fuselage and a window on the left. A whole series of EW-configured ADs ensued. An AD-3Q is pictured.

In the early 1950s, Douglas Aircraft, in recognition of the various uses that their AD was being used for, developed a wide-body version of the AD that could better accommodate multiple crew members. The AD-5Q (EA-1F after 1962) was the Navy/Marine EW aircraft of choice for a number of years, despite the advent of the jet age with its higher speeds and altitudes.

During the Vietnam War, the brass finally had to concede that the time of prop aircraft in combat or combat support was ending. The Marines made their move first, buying a small number of EW-dedicated Grumman A-6 Intruder jets: The EA-6A "Electric Intruder." (Pictured in Navy Reserve markings.)

The Navy liked what they saw but decided to up the ante with a more radical A-6 redesign, which became the EA-6B Prowler (with pilot and three Electronic Warfare Officers) and the Navy and Marines finally had a state-of-the-art EW aircraft with excellent passive and active (tactical radar and communications jamming) skills. In the mid-1980s, the EA-6B was further upgraded with the capability to fire AGM-88 HARM radar-homing missiles.

As an interim measure while the EA-6B was under development, the Navy converted a number of redundant Douglas A-3 Skywarrior heavy attack aircraft to an EW and tanker version, the EKA-3B. The problem with the EKA-3B was that it was very large and took up a lot of space on crowded carrier decks. After a few years, the EA-6B replaced the ancient EA-1Fs and the big EKA-3Bs and the problem was solved.

The EA-6B served admirably for many years, but technology was marching along, and the carrier air wings were changing; the F-18E and F-18F Super Hornet strike fighters became the central combat power of the carrier as a mixed fighter/attack force became essentially all fighters before the turn of the century. The two-place F-18F became the basis for an EA-6B replacement as the supersonic EA-18G Growler, better able to accompany high-performance strike fighters to the target and better able to defend itself in a high-threat environment.

The Marines were going to an all-STOVL fighter force with the F-35 and elected to not replace their EA-6Bs; like the Air Force, the Marine Corps now depends on EW pods or the Navy for EW support.

[Llarry]

The Navy/Marine electronic warfare (EW) aircraft discussed above have passive capabilities (What enemy radars are active? Where are they? What are their characteristics?) and active capabilities (Jamming enemy radars so they can't track our friendly aircraft, etc.)

The signals intelligence (SIGINT)) aircraft are related to the above but different: They are strictly passive and just listen. They monitor radars as the EW aircraft do, but with improved granularity. They also monitor radio communications to see what the enemy or potential adversary is up to. The radar part is called electronic intelligence (ELINT) and the communications part is called communications intelligence (COMINT). (At this point I must qualify my comments by saying I used to do this stuff but haven't in many years, so this is a bit like a sailmaker giving a lecture on steam boilers. )

In my day, tactical communications were most often voice transmission, which is why SIGINT often requires linguists. These days? Does text-to-cockpit sound reasonable? I don't know.

In any event, most often a SIGINT aircraft includes both ELINT and COMINT capabilities.

And now to the history:

The earliest U.S. SIGINT aircraft that I am aware of date to World War II: U.S. Army Air Forces crewmen of German ancestry were used aboard B-17 and B-24 bombers over Europe to monitor German fighter communications and give the bomber some indication of where and when the defending fighters would attack. This was rather ad hoc and the aircraft were still carrying bombs.

The Navy in the Pacific used a similar approach. There were language officers in the carrier task groups and they would ride along in a torpedo bomber and try to listen for Japanese communications.

It was well after WWII and once it was clear that the Cold War was on that dedicated SIGINT aircraft were made available. The earliest USAF SIGINT aircraft was the Boeing RB-29 (no photo), a single example of which was used to test the concept of a dedicated SIGINT platform. The RB-29 was followed by a number of RB-50G aircraft with both ELINT and COMINT capabilities. Unlike a photo recon aircraft, a SIGINT aircraft generally does not have to overfly the "target" as the radio horizon is about 1.33 times the visual horizon and can be far more depending on the signal in question.

USAF RB-50Gs -- and Navy PB4Y-2s -- made peripheral flights off the borders/coasts of the Communist countries on a daily basis. They were generally careful not to violate the target's airspace, but even so were attacked by fighters on a number of occasions. Quite a few SIGINT airplane crewmembers paid with their lives for these missions.

When the turbine-powered Lockheed C-130 Hercules came along, it was a revelation with better performance than past transports, and with a huge cargo bay that was suitable for just about anything. Soon the Air Force made a small number of C-130As into C-130A-II SIGINT collection aircraft, which were used in Europe. An advantage of the C-130A-II was that it looked like a regular transport, with differences only visible to a practiced eye. One ventured into Soviet airspace in 1958 and was shot down; there were no survivors. The RB-50Gs continued operating in Asia.

Meanwhile the Navy finally organized dedicated SIGINT squadrons, which they initially called "ECM squadrons" likely fooling no one. They flew a little-known modified patrol plane built by Martin, the P4M-1Q with a crew of ELINT and COMINT operators onboard.

Aircraft of both services were frequently shadowed or harassed by Soviet or Chinese fighters despite staying well clear and there were a number of other shootdowns during the 1950s and 1960s. (The harassment continues today by both Russian and Chinese fighters, I see on the news.)

In 1961 the Air Force started a revolution in SIGINT recon with the first use of the Boeing C-135 Stratotanker as a collection platform. Until then SIGINT had operated on a shoestring, but now the USAF got serious. There were a limited number of RC-135s (often without the R for recce designation) for some years until about 1967, when the RC-135M appeared in some numbers. The older Air Force SIGINT aircraft soon disappeared and the RC-135 had the field to itself, which continues to this day. The current fleet of RC-135V and RC-135W aircraft are probably up-to-date electronically but the airframes themselves are 60 years old.

To get back to the Navy, in 1960 two new aircraft were assigned to the two VQ squadrons (by now Fleet Air Reconnaissance Squadrons): The P4M-1Q was replaced by a roomier modified Lockheed Super Constellation, the EC-121M (old WV-2Q) and the Navy introduced a carrier-based SIGINT capability in the jet Douglas EA-3B Skywarrior (old A3D-2Q) that had a much smaller crew. The EA-3B was reasonably modern, although the crew would've appreciated ejection seats, but the EC-121M was a retread early warning aircraft adapted for SIGINT -- the Navy was still not willing to spend a lot for SIGINT capability.

That changed a few years later when the Navy finally recognized the need to replace the piston-powered EC-121M with something more modern. Early-production Lockheed P-3A patrol aircraft were extensively modified for SIGINT as the EP-3B and EP-3E. Over the years those well-worn airplanes were replaced by conversions of later P-3s.

In a sidebar, the Navy retired the old EA-3Bs, leaving carrier battle groups without attached SIGINT aircraft. A number of Lockheed S-3A carrier-capable antisubmarine planes were modified for SIGINT as the ES-3A but only served a few years before budget cuts led to their retirement.

Navy airborne SIGINT today resides in a single squadron of well-worn EP-3Es that are scheduled to retire within a year or two. The replacement is an unmanned air vehicle, the large MQ-4C Triton. This old SIGINTer is not sure how that will work out. I think the SIGINT-capable MQ-4Cs are already operational from Guam. I do hope it will work out well.

[flybigjet]

Took my dad and my (sort of) step-sister and her husband to Paul Allen's museum today (up north of Seattle).

I'll just drop this here. The only one on the planet, and it's in flyable condition.

R.

[Llarry]

In my post above on signals intelligence (SIGINT) aircraft, I omitted two less conventional aircraft that have performed SIGINT functions:

-- The Ryan AQM-34 high-altitude drone (unmanned air vehicle) used for communications intelligence in the first half of the 1970s.

-- The Lockheed U-2 aircraft used for SIGINT from the 1960s until now.

The Ryan AQM-34 was originally a target drone used by the services to practice air defenses. It was a small jet-powered drone using remote or preprogrammed guidance. During the Vietnam War, losses among photo recon aircraft were very high and the AQM-34 was adapted as a photo recon aircraft; if shot down by the enemy, at least crewmembers would not be killed or captured. A large number of variants served in this role.

The AQM-34 was also reconfigured with large wings to give it good high-altitude capability and in that form it was nearly ideal for SIGINT. Like its medium- or low-altitude brethren, if shot down at least no crewmembers would be lost. It was carried aloft in pairs under the wings of a DC-130 Hercules drone carrier/control aircraft and would climb to high-altitude after launch. The AQM-34 included a data link which would enable whatever signals it picked up to be monitored in real time on the ground far away. Upon completion of the mission, the drone would deploy a parachute and land in the sea, where a helicopter could pick it up and return it to base for refurbishment and use again.

A similar concept was used with the Lockheed U-2. Flying at high altitude, the U-2 could pick up signals at a considerable distance and had a similar data link whereby operators on the ground could tune receivers and listen to the results.

Both the AQM-34 and the early U-2s were tethered to a ground station electronically for the data link. Something better was needed to allow later U-2s to collect information anywhere and link it back to a distant ground station without worrying about distance. The answer, of course, was a satellite link. Developed in the 1980s under the project name Senior Span, the U-2 could now fly virtually anywhere within the view of a satellite and send the information to a ground station located anywhere. The direct data downlink was still an option where such use was convenient. The Senior Span antenna was enclosed in a distinctive fairing on the U-2's back.

As the U-2's cameras were updated from film to digital imaging, the capability to quickly relay information to the ground was not restricted to SIGINT.

Photos:
1) The original ground-launched BQM-34 Firebee target drone
2) A DC-130H carrying two AQM-34 drones
3) An AQM-34R Combat Dawn SIGINT recon drone in the NMUSAF
4) An early U-2 with SIGINT antennas (model)
5) U-2S with SIGINT antennas
6) Senior Span U-2S

[Llarry]

And I forgot two MORE SIGINT aircraft:

-- During the Vietnam War, the Air Force operated ancient Douglas C-47 transports in the SIGINT role at dangerous low altitudes over South Vietnam from 1966 to 1974. The RC-47N or -47P (later redesignated EC-47N/P) searched for, monitored and located Viet Cong radio signals. At least one of these aircraft was shot down by ground fire.

-- The U.S. Army has operated SIGINT-equipped Beechcraft King Air U-21s and C-12s for some 50+ years. I suspect, in fact, that the Guardrail system is the original downlinked data system for SIGINT, far predating the Air Force's U-2S. Guardrail battalions are active in the U.S., Korea and Europe and I believe have been busy since the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The Army is planning to replace the current RC-12Xs with a jet-powered aircraft in the future.

[M5Rick]

Airplane disaster at Japan's Haneda airport as a landing Airbus A-350 hit a coastguard Dash-8 on the same piece of runway. All passengers and crew escaped from the Airbus airliner while 5 crew on the Dash plane perished with the pilot somehow managing to escape.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...o-airport.html

[Llarry]

Four prototype AVIC AG600M Kunlong amphibious flying boats undergoing testing in N. China. These are being developed as firefighting aircraft.

[ezaircon4jc]

Originally Posted by M5Rick

Airplane disaster at Japan's Haneda airport as a landing Airbus A-350 hit a coastguard Dash-8 on the same piece of runway. All passengers and crew escaped from the Airbus airliner while 5 crew on the Dash plane perished with the pilot somehow managing to escape.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...o-airport.html

Somebody's got some 'splainin' to do. From what I ascertained, the A350 was rolling-out and the DH8 was somewhere (the active) he shouldn't have been. One of two, or both, parties screwed-up; the controller and/or the PIC of the DH8... IMHO.

[M5Rick]

Originally Posted by ezaircon4jc

Somebody's got some 'splainin' to do. From what I ascertained, the A350 was rolling-out and the DH8 was somewhere (the active) he shouldn't have been. One of two, or both, parties screwed-up; the controller and/or the PIC of the DH8... IMHO.

Latest is that the Dash plane was told to 'hold' by ATC short of the runway before the JAL airliner landed on top of it.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...a-Airport.html

[Llarry]

The future of vertical lift (helicopters and tilt-rotors) is starting to shape up a bit. It is still early, but Bell has two new designs that show promise to revolutionize the field.

Helicopter speed appears to be limited to about 200 miles per hour. The tilt rotor increases that by about 50 percent to about 300. In almost all areas of aviation, faster is better but of course there are always tradeoffs.

The U.S. Marine Corps was the first military service to enthusiastically embrace the tilt-rotor. The Marines replaced their large fleet of Boeing Vertol CH-46E (Model 107) medium-lift helicopters with the MV-22 and the MV-22B is now the Marines' standard medium lift aircraft. The USAF also purchased a number of CV-22Bs for special operations. At one time, the Navy considered buying the V-22 for combat search and rescue and for anti-submarine warfare, but in the end has only bought a relatively small number of CMV-22Bs for the transport role on aircraft carriers. Japan's army has also purchased a small number of MV-22Bs.

The MV-22B is a large aircraft, though; both the U.S. Navy and the U.S. Army are investigating replacements for their medium-size vertical lift aircraft, the Sikorsky H-60, which is used in large numbers by both services and has been in service for 40+ years. The Army is ahead in their search for a replacement, having chosen the Bell V-280 Valor as a technology demonstrator/prototype. The cost to replace a large fleet of Army UH-60s is daunting, but the military advantages are considerable.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_V-280_Valor

While the Navy would love to leverage the Army's progress to date in development to replace its MH-60s, the V-280 is simply too large for the helicopter decks and hangars on Navy warships such as destroyers and frigates. Bell has developed a new tilt-rotor concept, the V-247 Vigilant, in an attempt to meet the Navy's needs. The V-247 is an unmanned tilt-rotor that is only a paper exercise so far but shows some promise. It will be some years before the concept matures into actual hardware. The elimination of the crew from a Navy vertical-lift workhorse is controversial as well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_V-247_Vigilant

The tilt-rotor shows potential in other areas. A four-rotor machine with a cargo bay the size of a C-130? A gunship to replace Army AH-64s and Marine AH-1s? Commercial tilt-rotors as executive or commuter or offshore oil platform support aircraft? The U.S. Coast Guard it seems is perennially operating on a shoestring but a tilt-rotor would seem a natural for that service.

Despite the success of the V-22, it would appear that the tilt-rotor story is just getting started.

[BMWGUYinCO]

As I was looking over this thread, it suddenly occurred to me that I have built at least 80% of everything pictured in here through plastic model kits, either by Revell, Tamaya, etc. I used to be very good and even assembled dioramas.

In fact, I have an unopened Revell 1:72 kit of the SR-71 Blackbird ready to go. I haven't built a kit in over 10 years...I should start!

[ezaircon4jc]

Originally Posted by M5Rick

Latest is that the Dash plane was told to 'hold' by ATC short of the runway before the JAL airliner landed on top of it.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...a-Airport.html

I heard a tape from an unofficial source on the Tube last night, and the controller's instructions seemed a bit vague, but nowhere did he say to take the active; something about holding at the C5 (the taxiway). I believe the CG pilot screwed-up and will ultimately be held responsible.

[vreihen16]

Originally Posted by ezaircon4jc

I heard a tape from an unofficial source on the Tube last night, and the controller's instructions seemed a bit vague, but nowhere did he say to take the active; something about holding at the C5 (the taxiway). I believe the CG pilot screwed-up and will ultimately be held responsible.

A news article that I read stated that there was a current NOTAM for the taxiway stop lights being inoperative at that runway intersection.....

[M-technik-3]

The Lights had been nonop since 27 Dec 23. Think this will be a major contributor.

[Llarry]

In the continuing move to smaller and more precise bombs, the U.S. forces have recently given Raytheon a contract to produce 1,500 GBU-53/B Stormbreaker small-diameter bombs for both Air Force and Navy use.

The Stormbreaker is a 204-pound weapon with a shaped blast/fragmentation warhead and is guided by GPS and an inertial nav system. It can glide a considerable distance to the target after release and has several homing modes which enable it to hit moving targets such as vehicles, marking an improvement over the earlier GBU-39 small diameter bomb. It is carried by the F-15E and F-18E/F initially but wider use is anticipated. Smaller weapons like this can minimize collateral damage when attacking a ground target.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GBU-53/B_StormBreaker

[Llarry]

I believe the largest piston aircraft engine ever built was the U.S. Lycoming R-7755 of World War II. It was a liquid-cooled radial with four rows of nine cylinders each, totaling 7,750 cubic inches (127 liters) of displacement. This monster weighed 6,050 pounds dry and produced 5,000 horsepower. It was meant for the Convair B-36 heavy bomber, but only two prototypes of the engine were built. The Army Air Forces cancelled the project in 1946.

The B-36 went on to serve for a number of years with six R-4360 28-cylinder radials (and four jet supplementary jet engines in later models.)