tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4581529699221437110.post6955707437203046390..comments2024-03-22T06:56:26.797-04:00Comments on U.S. Navy Aircraft History: Halcyon DaysTailspinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17837863895661437038noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4581529699221437110.post-14625242325032126582011-09-19T07:22:59.966-04:002011-09-19T07:22:59.966-04:00I almost completely agree with the Anonymous on th...I almost completely agree with the Anonymous on the East Coast oriented F2H-4, but only two exceptions: One is VMF/VMF(AW)/VMA-214 “Black Sheep” flew F2H-4 Jun1953 through April 1958 based at MCAS EL TORO, CA or MCAS KANEOHE BAY, HI as a subordinate unit of MAG-15 or MAG-13, with an April-September 1957 WestPac deployment aboard CVA-19 USS HANCOCK as a unit of ATG-2, the other is VAW-11 the only Carrier-Based Early Warning Squadron on the West Coast (home based at NAS NORTH ISLANDL) at that time, flew F2H-4 September 1958 through October 1959 with a WestPac deployment of VAW-11 Det.P aboard CVS-12 USS HORNET along with VS-38 and HS-8 for the all-weather fleet air defense mission with AAM-N-7 Sidewinder equipped four F2H-4 and one F2H-3, for the period of April-October 1959.<br />Another coast dependent aircraft was AD-7/A-1J Skyraider, which was West Coast dependent, only known exception was NAS JACKSONVILLE based VA-176 when an A-1J (Bu.No.142065/AK-200) joined in July through October 1966 (only the period the squadron deployed to the Vietnam waters) while the squadron deployed aboard CVS-11 USS INTREPID as a unit of CVW-10 to WestPac (Vietnam War) for April-November 1966. <br />Not only FJ-4B as Anonymous pointed, but “pure” FJ-4 also is coast specific. As the first line fighter, all FJ-4 were assigned to USMC units except for West Coast Navy RAG squadrons for proficiency mission for Fleet FJ-4B squadrons, but no East Coast Marine units equipped FJ-4. Later many FJ-4 were assigned to Navy Utility Squadrons (VU’s) but no East Coast VU's flown FJ-4, as far as I know.<br />HIDEKI YAMAUCHI, Atsugi Gombey Club.OinC Det.L, AGCnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4581529699221437110.post-43201978715493137532011-08-02T15:30:23.410-04:002011-08-02T15:30:23.410-04:00The mirror provided the visual glide slope for the...The mirror provided the visual glide slope for the descending, constant angle of attack approach. However, there may have been experiments with it on angle decks in the U.S. Navy before the mirror became available, specifically with the F7U Cutlass. (The Brits reportedly used a descending approach on axial decks; see http://thanlont.blogspot.com/2009/05/waving-them-aboard.html.)<br /><br />The mirror landing system was evaluated by VX-3 in September 1955 and recommended for incorporation, which was authorized in November. However, it took a few years to purchase systems, install them on carriers when they came back back from deployments, and train the pilots to use them so it may not have been in widespread use until 1957, a year or more after this outing was filmed.<br /><br />I'm pretty sure the landing sink rate requirement didn't change with the introduction of the mirror, so it probably wasn't harder on the airplane than a cut from a flat approach. As far as I know, there was no change to the airplanes as a result of the transition to the mirror system. There is anecdotal evidence that it was beneficial: The F7U Cutlass might not have acquired its reputation for being an "Ensign Killer" if it had been flown from angle decks using the mirror from the beginning and the F8U Crusader might had as short or even shorter career if it had deployed on axial decks.Tailspinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17837863895661437038noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4581529699221437110.post-46456464436420904962011-08-02T14:04:30.063-04:002011-08-02T14:04:30.063-04:00What a great film/video! I was taken by how diffe...What a great film/video! I was taken by how different these jets look coming aboard than they did in my day (late 60’s, early 70’s) and still look today. When did the Navy go to the constant angle of attack approach all the way to the deck (sometimes referred to as a controlled crash)? Was the change dependent on the use of the mirror landing system, or was the mirror a result of that type approach? And/or, was the change aircraft dependent? Could these aircraft and their landing gear have stood up to constant AoA approaches? <br /><br />Great stuff. Thanks.<br />Mikefliermikehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13034392194043651958noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4581529699221437110.post-70287930581112731082011-07-29T13:39:32.804-04:002011-07-29T13:39:32.804-04:00Golly, I didn't know that the location of the ...Golly, I didn't know that the location of the -3 and -4 Banshees was coast dependent. It certainly simplifies identification of which dash number is pictured if the BuNo isn't visible. It seems likely that it was to simplify support (e.g. spares and manufacturer tech reps) of the two different fire control systems.<br /><br />The FJ-4B was assigned to west coast air groups only. So was the FJ-1 until it went to the reserves. As far as I know, the FH-1 was only based on the east coast except maybe for the Marine Corps and then the reserves. The initial assignment of the -1/2 Banshees and the F9F Panthers was also somewhat coast dependent, which is why there weren't any Banshees over Korea in the first year or two of the war.Tailspinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17837863895661437038noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4581529699221437110.post-74727564129499941552011-07-29T13:16:32.006-04:002011-07-29T13:16:32.006-04:00Tommy: As usual great stuff. To add to your comme...Tommy: As usual great stuff. To add to your comments, both the F9F-8B and the F7U-3M were placeholder (fighter) attack aircraft pending the arrival the A4D and the FJ-4B, thus both types were operated by VA Squadrons. I believe the FJ-4B was West Coast Navy only. The F7U-3M could carry a slightly heavier load than the standard Cutlass and it could carry the MK-7 and MK-12 special weapons which was what "attack" really meant in those days. Also, the F2H-3 was the Big Banjo with the same engines as the smaller F2H-2 (J-34WE-34). The F2H-4 actually had the J-34WE-38 which had about 250 extra pounds of thrust per side. The other difference was that the Radar in the Dash-3 was the Westinghouse APQ-41 (in reality a F3D Skyknight APQ-35 configured for pilot only operation). The Dash-4 had the Hughes E-10 fire control system with the APG-37 Radar which I believe was also in later model F-86D Sabers. Lastly, just like the FJ-4B being Coast specific, I believe the F2H-3 was a West Coast aircraft and the F2H-4 was an East Coast Aircraft...do you know why?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com