• Hi Guest - Come check out all of the new CP Merch Shop! Now you can support CigarPass buy purchasing hats, apparel, and more...
    Click here to visit! here...

Air Warriors

Saxon9075 said:
My
Godfather flew Phantoms in the 60's in the Air Force. . If I remember correctly the Phantom was used by both Air Force and Navy. Anyway he was sent to Carrier School to study the feasibility of Air Force Pilots landing on a carrier if shot up. (I read you had something like 90% chance of being captured if shot down over land but 90% chance of recovery if you could make it to the water. {numbers made up but it was astoundingly high}). Anyway he said he did not know how Navy pilots regularly landed on carriers and were able to use the plane again ! But it was a great air platform.
Click to expand...
Obviously a one-and-done USAF landing on a carrier would be significantly better (and cheaper) than losing a life and a jet in the jungle or in the water, but it makes me wonder whether the prospective plan was to helicopter sling load a broken airplane from a carrier back to an inland air base, or just push the USAF jet overboard in deep waters? Surely there wasn't enough room to act as a floating hospital ship to ferry sick USAF aircraft back to a safe port where they could be recovered on land, and even if repairs from enemy fire were possible, it still brings up the fact these jets were not made for cat takeoffs... and neither were the pilots!
 
kann said:
Obviously a one-and-done USAF landing on a carrier would be significantly better (and cheaper) than losing a life and a jet in the jungle or in the water, but it makes me wonder whether the prospective plan was to helicopter sling load a broken airplane from a carrier back to an inland air base, or just push the USAF jet overboard in deep waters? Surely there wasn't enough room to act as a floating hospital ship to ferry sick USAF aircraft back to a safe port where they could be recovered on land, and even if repairs from enemy fire were possible, it still brings up the fact these jets were not made for cat takeoffs... and neither were the pilots!
Click to expand...
From my time on a carrier I seriously doubt any Air Boss would ever let an Air Force pilot make an attempt to land on the ship, let alone one in a wounded bird. A carrier is one of the most dangerous environments in all of aviation, and landing currency rules the flight schedule because it is so fleeting. In order to land on the ship, it takes months of practice ashore and dedicated flights at sea leaving you with a 10 day currency for day ops, and 7 day currency for night ops. If a carrier pilot goes beyond those limits, he has to go back to the shore to requalify there before he can make an approach on the ship.

More likely, the plan would have been for wounded USAF jets to eject along side a carrier and be rescued by a helo or small boy.
 
kann said:
Obviously a one-and-done USAF landing on a carrier would be significantly better (and cheaper) than losing a life and a jet in the jungle or in the water, but it makes me wonder whether the prospective plan was to helicopter sling load a broken airplane from a carrier back to an inland air base, or just push the USAF jet overboard in deep waters? Surely there wasn't enough room to act as a floating hospital ship to ferry sick USAF aircraft back to a safe port where they could be recovered on land, and even if repairs from enemy fire were possible, it still brings up the fact these jets were not made for cat takeoffs... and neither were the pilots!
Click to expand...
I don't know, I just remember him saying he was being sent to Naval training. I just remember you had a much better chance of survival if you ditched over water. I wonder if the dual service F4 was a McNamara idea. Not everything he did was wrong. He said when he came in there were 40 different type of combat boot being ordered. He also approved the standard inflight refueling system. Up to then the navy had and the Air Force had another.
 
Nihon_Ni said:
From my time on a carrier I seriously doubt any Air Boss would ever let an Air Force pilot make an attempt to land on the ship, let alone one in a wounded bird. A carrier is one of the most dangerous environments in all of aviation, and landing currency rules the flight schedule because it is so fleeting. In order to land on the ship, it takes months of practice ashore and dedicated flights at sea leaving you with a 10 day currency for day ops, and 7 day currency for night ops. If a carrier pilot goes beyond those limits, he has to go back to the shore to requalify there before he can make an approach on the ship.

More likely, the plan would have been for wounded USAF jets to eject along side a carrier and be rescued by a helo or small boy.
Click to expand...
I wish I could say more but I was very young and never got into the nuts and bolts. I think you are correct. He was sent to study the feasibility of it and I believe it was decided it was a bad idea. I do know he ejected twice, both times over water and after the second his tour was over. I would be curious if I could ever find that study and see what was written. I was never on a carrier but read after a shore tour a Naval Aviator has to requaligfy through the Fleet Replacment Squadron to go back to sea ?
 
Nihon_Ni said:
From my time on a carrier I seriously doubt any Air Boss would ever let an Air Force pilot make an attempt to land on the ship, let alone one in a wounded bird. A carrier is one of the most dangerous environments in all of aviation, and landing currency rules the flight schedule because it is so fleeting. In order to land on the ship, it takes months of practice ashore and dedicated flights at sea leaving you with a 10 day currency for day ops, and 7 day currency for night ops. If a carrier pilot goes beyond those limits, he has to go back to the shore to requalify there before he can make an approach on the ship.

More likely, the plan would have been for wounded USAF jets to eject along side a carrier and be rescued by a helo or small boy.
Click to expand...
That was more along the lines of what I was thinking, too -- no way would an Air Force pilot be allowed to attempt a carrier landing, ESPECIALLY under such unpredictable circumstances. I was unaware the currency windows were that small, though! It absolutely 100% makes sense, though.
 
I always thought that woukd be an interesting MOS, Aerial Refueler. Then I had a friend whi did it and said it was boring and they stationed you in places like Minot, ND
 
tone-ny said:
1996 a long time ago.
Click to expand...

I was 19... was a fun year. Thanks for helping keeping our country and loved ones safe. Very appreciated.

Back to the birds... do they even refuel with those arms anymore.. or is it all baskets at the end of a fuel line now?
 
xyz123 said:
I was 19... was a fun year. Thanks for helping keeping our country and loved ones safe. Very appreciated.

Back to the birds... do they even refuel with those arms anymore.. or is it all baskets at the end of a fuel line now?
Click to expand...
Almost all AF planes use the boom, Navy planes use drouge and basket. The KC-10 refuels both methods.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top