[cfm56d7b]

Originally Posted by Lady Jane

Lockheed S-3 Viking.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_S-3_Viking


Attachment 3318914

S3 Viking was a phenomenal aircraft during its time. S3 could serve as a dedicated carrier-based tanker, dedicated carrier-based antisubmarine aircraft - with twice the range of its peers on the flight deck.

The fixed wing antisubmarine role has no replacement at the present time.

"Long-distance patrol duties are now confined to large P-3 and P-8 maritime patrol planes, which operate from bases on land. This means the carriers can only make limited contributions to the antisubmarine mission, even though we live in a time when cheap and effective submarines are proliferating to an unprecedented degree in the Pacific, and submarines have repeatedly succeeded in slipping through defenses to sink carriers in naval exercises."

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/bu...bmarines-48267

There were also several variants of the Viking, including “Aladdin” and “Beartrap” aircraft, flying in intelligence missions.

[Llarry]

The competition between Grumman and Vought in the mid- to late-1940s had been won by Vought with their F4U Corsair, which became plentiful aboard Navy carriers after World War II (see above post.) But jet fighters were the next big thing and all the manufacturers were anxious to get contracts to provide the Navy and Marine Corps with jets. Vought was a traditional and preferred supplier but its F6U (not pictured) turned out to be a disappointment.

Reliable Grumman designed a jet fighter around the Rolls-Royce Nene jet, which was license-built by Pratt & Whitney as the J42. The resulting F9F-2 Panther first flew in 1947 and appeared to show promise. But all the early jets required extensive development to become useful carrier fighters.

There was a new entrant in the competition, though; McDonnell had designed the first Navy jet fighter, the FH-1 (1st photo), which first flew in prototype form in 1945 and had been built in very limited numbers.

McDonnell built upon that early experience with a greatly improved aircraft designated the F2H Banshee. The F2H first flew in 1947 and by 1950 had entered service as the F2H-2 with Navy and Marine fighter squadrons. The F2H-2 used twin Westinghouse J30 jet engines buried in the wing roots and was equipped with the new ejection seat for the pilot.

The Grumman F9F-2 had entered service slightly ahead of the F2H. When the Korean war started in mid-1950, several carriers each had a single F9F fighter squadron aboard (as well as several F4U Corsair squadrons). The F9F-2 was soon joined in combat over Korea by F2H-2 Banshee squadrons. As the war progressed, carriers embarked two jet fighter squadrons each.

A comparison between the F9F-2 and the F2H-2 reveals that both aircraft had about the same turn of speed -- 575 mph or 925 kmh -- and both were initially armed with four 20mm cannon. Both airplanes were soon capable of dropping bombs and firing rockets as well, although the Banshee had a larger bomb capacity. The F2H also had a superior ceiling; although both aircraft were adapted to use as unarmed photo aircraft, the Banshee excelled in the photo recon role.

Both companies developed improved versions, but only Grumman's F9F-5 saw combat in Korea. The F9F-5 Panther had larger tail surfaces and an uprated P&W J48 engine. When just comparing production numbers of these early Navy carrier day fighters, Grumman came out on top, building 1,385 F9F Panthers of all types. McDonnell was a distant second with 308 F2H-2s built.

Post-script: The competition went on for several more years. Grumman modified the F9F Panther with swept wings for better speed and the result was the F9F-6 Cougar, which was a transonic aircraft.
McDonnell went in another direction, lengthening the F2H to increase fuel capacity and adding radar. This transformed the resulting F2H-3 into the first widely used night/all-weather carrier fighter used by Navy and Marine squadrons (and later by the Royal Canadian Navy). The F2H-3 was also capable of carrying a nuclear bomb.

Both the Cougar and the Banshee managed to survive into the 1960s; the Cougar as an advanced trainer and the later Banshees in Navy Reserve squadrons.

[Llarry]

An interesting contrast in the size and configuration of U.S. Air Force aircraft: C-5 Galaxy, C-130 Hercules, F-15 Eagle, F-15E Strike Eagle and tail of KC-135 Stratotanker on the right. Looks like an open house or airshow display.

[Llarry]

A photo history of U.S. Navy and Marine Corps photo aircraft:
1) Before 1944, aerial photos were taken by rear seat crewmen with hand-held cameras, generally from observation, scout or scout bomber aircraft.
2) The first photo recon aircraft was the F6F Hellcat, which retained its machine gun armament but added a side-facing camera behind the cockpit area. Each carrier fighter squadron was assigned several F6F-3P or F6F-5P photo fighters. The Marines operated whole squadrons of photo Hellcats.
3) Long range photo recon of Japanese installations was performed by PB4Y-1P (photo-configured Navy versions of the B-24); these lasted well after World War II.
4) The Vought F4U Corsair got into the recon business after WWII with the F4U-4P (pictured) and the improved F4U-5P.
5) The Marines used the photo-configured F7F-3P Tigercat in the late 1940s and early 1950s.
6) Both the F9F Panther (no photo) and the F2H Banshee jets were built in unarmed photo form in the early 1950s; F2H-2P pictured with elongated nose housing a number of cameras.
7) The three-engine (two prop, one jet) Navy AJ-2P Savage actually conducted hazardous overflights of China in the 1950s.
8) The straight-wing F2H and F9F photo planes were succeeded by the transonic swept-wing F9F-8P Cougar later in the 1950s.
9) Photo recon went supersonic with the RF-8A (former F8U-1P) Crusader around 1960; These played a key role in the Cuban missile crisis of 1962 and Vietnam.
10) The RA-3B Skywarrior was the Navy's "heavy" photo aircraft of the 1960s and 1970s; the attached photo shows an RA-3B with Vietnam-era camouflage paint.
11) When the A-5 Vigilante proved a failure as a nuclear bomber, it was adapted for use in recon as the RA-5C.
12) The photo Phantom RF-4B was exclusively used by the Marine Corps. Another Vietnam veteran.
13) The last dedicated Navy photo aircraft was the RF-8G, modified and updated from the earlier RF-8A, retired in 1987.
14) Carrier-based recon from the 1970s to about 2000 was performed by the F-14 Tomcat using the TARPS pod. The pictured aircraft is ready for trouble with not only the photo pod but also missile armament.
15) Current carrier-based photo recon is performed by the SHARPS pod carried by the F/A-18 Super Hornet.
16) (No photo) Marine Corps tactical recon is now performed by shorter-range UAVs

[Llarry]

Having posted photos of many Navy/Marine photo aircraft, allow me to offer a little equal opportunity to the U.S. Army Air Forces and U.S. Air Force.

Before the founding of the USAF, USAAF recon aircraft were designated F for Foto. Once the Air Force became its own service, recon aircraft were designated by the original type with an R prefix for reconnaissance.

In approximate date order:
-- F-2 (no photo) Beechcraft C-45 photo
-- F-3 (no photo) Douglas A-20 recon
-- F-4 (no photo) Lockheed early model P-38 Lightning recon
-- F-5 (photo 1) Late model P-38 photo Lightning
-- F-6 (photo 2) North American P-51 photo Mustang -- later became RF-51
-- F-7 (photo 3) Consolidated B-24 photo Liberator
-- F-13 (photo 4) Boeing B-29 photo Superfortress -- later became RB-29
-- F-15 (photo 5) Northrop Reporter based on P-61 Black Widow
-- RB-36 (photo 6) Recon version of Convair B-36 Peacemaker; some retained capability for bombing as well as recon
-- RB-45 (photo 7) Photo version of North American B-45 Tornado
-- RF-84 (photo 8) Photo version of Republic F-84F
-- RB-47 (photo 9) Photo recon version of Boeing B-47 Stratojet, which also had a non-photo RB-47 version used for signals intelligence recon
-- RB-57 (photos 10 & 11) Recon versions of Martin B-57 (derived from UK Canberra); early versions were tactical photo birds (not pictured); the later RB-57D (photo 10) and RB-57F (photo 11) were greatly revised big-wing strategic recon aircraft. A couple of F models live on under NASA ownership as WB-57Fs.
-- U-2 (photos 12 & 13) The long-lived Lockheed Dragon Lady; the earliest (photo 12) versions were CIA aircraft but ultimately turned over to the Air Force; the currently active U-2S (photo 13) is strictly USAF. The U-2 is periodically scheduled for retirement, but it lives on.
-- RB-66 (photo 14) The recon version of the Douglas B-66 Destroyer
-- RF-101 (photo 15) The McDonnell photo Voodoo. A stalwart of the Vietnam war.
-- SR-71 (photo 16) The famous Lockheed Blackbird strategic recon aircraft
-- RF-4 (photo 17) Another important aircraft of the Vietnam war and the recon version of the McDonnell F-4 Phantom
-- AAQ-33 Sniper pod (photo 18) The Sniper pod includes more than photo capabilities; it is used on F-15E, F-16, B-1, B-52 and A-10 aircraft, as well as many other nations' aircraft.

Note that this list omits many important non-photo reconnaissance aircraft, such as the RB-50, C-130A II RC-135 and RC-47 SIGINT recon aircraft. It also omits a few covert photo aircraft conversions of the Cold War.

[Llarry]

I still haven't seen more than two F-15EXs flying, but presumably more are coming soon. But I wanted to post this photo of the missile loadout given the new outer wing pylon. What a beast! Assuming the loadout is symmetrical, this aircraft is carrying 12 (!) AIM-120 air-to-air missiles as well as two large JASSM air-to-surface missiles. Whew!

[sygazelle]

Originally Posted by cfm56d7b

"Long-distance patrol duties are now confined to large P-3 and P-8 maritime patrol planes, which operate from bases on land..."

...and sea, apparently. This P8 just overshot the runway today and is now sea-based. Luckly, everybody is safe.

[Llarry]

Originally Posted by sygazelle

...and sea, apparently. This P8 just overshot the runway today and is now sea-based. Luckly, everybody is safe.

It's great to hear that the crew is safe. The U.S. Navy bought 117 P-8As and the final delivery was some years ago. While they purchase a few extra to account for attrition, the P-8A is a US$200 million aircraft. Ouch!

[ezaircon4jc]

Originally Posted by sygazelle

...and sea, apparently. This P8 just overshot the runway today and is now sea-based. Luckly, everybody is safe.

Ahhhhh..... That'll buff right out.

[Llarry]

Cool photo of a B-1B bomber on final to Tinker AFB, Oklahoma. The three pairs of bomb bay doors -- two forward of the main landing gear and one behind -- are visible. Pretty awesome airplane!

EDIT: The (rather small) diagram shows why the B-1B is the heavy lifter of the current bombers: Three bomb bays (and the forward two can be combined into one double-size bay) and large bomb load.

[flybigjet]

Originally Posted by Llarry

Cool photo of a B-1B bomber on final to Tinker AFB, Oklahoma. The three pairs of bomb bay doors -- two forward of the main landing gear and one behind -- are visible. Pretty awesome airplane!

EDIT: The (rather small) diagram shows why the B-1B is the heavy lifter of the current bombers: Three bomb bays (and the forward two can be combined into one double-size bay) and large bomb load.

To put things in perspective-

BOMB LOAD: Depending on types of bombs, maximum normal load could go to 8,000 lbs. If B-17 was fitted with special external racks, maximum normal short-range bomb load could go as high as 17,600 lbs.

[Lady Jane]

To complement the Navy thread, here's a comparison pic of the K-1 vs the P-8.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kawasaki_P-1

[ezaircon4jc]

OK boys & girls...

Name this bird...

[Lady Jane]

Originally Posted by ezaircon4jc

OK boys & girls...

Name this bird...

DC-5 a.k.a the Forgotten airliner.

http://aviastar.org/air/usa/douglas_dc-5.php

[Llarry]

Originally Posted by Lady Jane

To complement the Navy thread, here's a comparison pic of the P-1 vs the P-8.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kawasaki_P-1

One of the interesting differences between the P-1 and the P-8 is that the P-1 retains the traditional ASW aircraft MAD (Magnetic Anomaly Detection) boom, which implies that the JMSDF uses the P-1 at low level, as the MAD is ineffective at higher altitudes.

[Lady Jane]

Originally Posted by Llarry

One of the interesting differences between the P-1 and the P-8 is that the P-1 retains the traditional ASW aircraft MAD (Magnetic Anomaly Detection) boom, which implies that the JMSDF uses the P-1 at low level, as the MAD is ineffective at higher altitudes.

Growing up on an airbase with Squadrons of CP-140 Auroras (Canadian P-3) I got to listen to many conversations of aircrews during BBQs. One thing I remember is that during a MAD run, the aircraft had to perform a series of yaws, rolls and pitches in order to distinguish between a submarine and naturally occurring ore and minerals at the bottom of the ocean. Barf bags were standard issues.

[Llarry]

Originally Posted by Lady Jane

Growing up on an airbase with Squadrons of CP-140 Auroras (Canadian P-3) I got to listen to many conversations of aircrews during BBQs. One thing I remember is that during a MAD run, the aircraft had to perform a series of yaws, rolls and pitches in order to distinguish between a submarine and naturally occurring ore and minerals at the bottom of the ocean. Barf bags were standard issues.

I've read stories of the Grumman S-2 flying low-level ASW missions where they would do very tight circles at very low altitude over the presumed location of the target submarine. I believe there were a couple of occasions where the aircraft put a wingtip into the water and crashed.

[Llarry]

Originally Posted by cfm56d7b

S3 Viking was a phenomenal aircraft during its time. S3 could serve as a dedicated carrier-based tanker, dedicated carrier-based antisubmarine aircraft - with twice the range of its peers on the flight deck.

The fixed wing antisubmarine role has no replacement at the present time.

"Long-distance patrol duties are now confined to large P-3 and P-8 maritime patrol planes, which operate from bases on land. This means the carriers can only make limited contributions to the antisubmarine mission, even though we live in a time when cheap and effective submarines are proliferating to an unprecedented degree in the Pacific, and submarines have repeatedly succeeded in slipping through defenses to sink carriers in naval exercises."

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/bu...bmarines-48267

There were also several variants of the Viking, including “Aladdin” and “Beartrap” aircraft, flying in intelligence missions.

There have been periodic calls to bring back the S-3 in naval aviation circles. But the ASW equipment was removed over 20 years ago and the S-3 turned into the primary air refueling aircraft of the carriers. I don't think there's any way that the S-3 could be resurrected as a viable ASW aircraft. The point about vulnerability of aircraft carriers to submarine attack is perfectly valid. The problem is that there is no space on a carrier for an additional squadron of any type without taking something off. The obvious answer is to reduce the strike fighters by one squadron (from four to three) but that is a major hit to the striking power of the carrier and the leadership of the U.S. Navy is loathe to do that. The MH-60R ASW helicopter is the defense of choice now but that is short-ranged.

When the V-22 Osprey was in development, the U.S. Navy there was speculation about an SV-22 ASW variant. That would have been an awesome machine but would not have had the S-3's range or speed and the large SV-22 would have taken up too much space on the deck of the carrier and would have been too large for surface combatant duty.

[Llarry]

U.S. Navy and Marine Corps aviation test and evaluation activities are based at a number of facilities around the U.S. The most important of these is at Patuxent River, Maryland, near the Chesapeake Bay. In addition to the Test Pilot School, Patuxent hosts a number of test squadrons:
-- VX-1 'Pioneers' concentrates on antisubmarine testing and flies E-2D Hawkeye, P-8A Poseidon and MH-60R/S helicopters.
-- VXS-1 'Warlocks' works with the Naval Research Laboratory and flies P-3C Orion, RC-12M King Air and UV-18A Twin Otter aircraft.
-- VX-20 'Force' flies a variety of prop and multiengine aircraft such as KC-130s, etc.
-- HX-21 'Blackjacks' flies rotary-wing aircraft
-- VX-23 'Salty Dogs' is the Strike Directorate and flies F-18E/F, EA-18G, and F-35C aircraft
-- UX-24 operates UAVs from outlying Webster Field

Moving West, the sole Marine test and evaluation unit is located at Yuma, Arizona:
-- VMX-1 flies all types of aircraft flown by the Marines: F-35B, F-18C/D, AV-8B, KC-130J, MV-22B, AH-1Z and UH-1Y; a detachment at New River, North Carolina flies the heavy CH-53K.

China Lake, California, is another important center for testing. There are two squadrons based there:
-- VX-9 'Vampires' conducts tactical testing and flies F-18E/F and EA-18G aircraft; a detachment at nearby Edwards AFB flies the F-35C.
-- VX-31 'Dust Devils' conducts a wide range of weapons testing and flies all types of F-18s, EA-18G, AV-8B and MH-60s.

Also in California is the NAS at Point Mugu:
-- VX-30 'Bloodhounds' provides security and services for test ranges in the Pacific and flies test-configured NC-20G and NC-37B Gulfstreams, the KC-130T transport/tanker and E-2D. VX-30 has historically flown specially-configured P-3s but those are being retired.

It's worth noting that Marines are integrated into all these units; for instance, the current CO of UX-24 is a Marine Lieutenant Colonel.

[M-technik-3]

Originally Posted by Llarry

An interesting contrast in the size and configuration of U.S. Air Force aircraft: C-5 Galaxy, C-130 Hercules, F-15 Eagle, F-15E Strike Eagle and tail of KC-135 Stratotanker on the right. Looks like an open house or airshow display.

Looks like Lakenheath because Mildenhall's ramp is tiny in comparison on the AMC ramp.

I don't remember either UK base having a C5 tow bar or tug though.

[3.0L]

Launch Radar24, select on aircraft on the map, then click on the new 3D button on the lower left of the window (subscribers only) and within a few moments you will be positioned as a chase plane behind that aircraft while flying over Bing satellite maps. Quite realistic, except the GPS tracking can be off a few feet when the airplane lands or takes off.

This morning I saw a helicopter depart our local airport, so I clicked on it, then clicked 3D. Moments later I could hear the helicopter approaching while seeing my house on the map as he passed by.

Lot's of fun!

https://www.flightradar24.com/37.98,-117.87/7

[BMWGUYinCO]

Originally Posted by 3.0L

Launch Radar24...

https://www.flightradar24.com/37.98,-117.87/7

I love this site - it's cool to see Airbus A380s flying again!