By Tommy H. Thomason

Wednesday, February 27, 2013

Your Speed May Vary

Once upon a time, the U.S. Navy and Air Force vied with each other and the military services of foreign countries to set aircraft performance records in speed and altitude. Attempts at surpassing the existing records did not always reflect operational capability although the record-setting aircraft usually bore a much closer resemblance to their counterparts on the flight line than say, some of the air racers at Reno to their original configuration.

For example, in the days before jets had enough power to exceed the speed of sound in level flight and the attempt had to be made at an altitude just above the ground, the venue for the record attempt was increasingly someplace hot. The limit on speed had become the abrupt change in drag with Mach number. Mach number varied with air temperature. Higher temperatures meant a higher Mach number and therefore the airplane could achieve a higher speed over the ground.

However, the record aircraft were almost never stock. Engines vary more than you might think in terms of horsepower and thrust even before being tweaked for more. Engine and other limits were routinely exceeded at the expense of durability and safety. Removal of nonessential stuff, e.g. military equipment, to reduce drag and weight was a standard practice. (If guns and ammunition were carried, the fact was always worthy of note in the press release announcing the record.)

I was recently reminded of a couple of examples of somewhat more extensive modifications. The thrust provided by the J79 engines in the F4H-1 that then LtCol Robert Robinson (USMC) used to set a speed record of 1,606 mph in December 1961 was augmented by water injection.

 Robert F. Dorr Collection
If you look closely at the aft cockpit of the record setting airplane, you'll see what appears to be the water tank.
Note also the non-standard reinforcement of the windscreen. According to Robbie, the windscreen over-temperature light was on for most of the speed run, warning of imminent failure.

Needless to say, Phantoms in the fleet were not capable of anywhere near 1,600 mph.

Even more extensive modifications were made to a Navy HSS-2 in pursuit of a helicopter speed record. In February 1962, it was used to set a record of 210 mph versus a fleet Sea King's top speed of not much more than 150 mph.
 The most significant modification was the replacement of the landing gear with skids. It was also lightened as much as possible and tape and filler applied to reduce drag. For more on that project, see http://www.thisdayinaviation.com/5-february-1962/

Unofficial speed records were even more likely to approach bogus. One example is the well- publicized report that the XF4U-1 had demonstrated a speed of 400 mph. For a discussion of the unlikelihood of that, at least in late 1940, see http://thanlont.blogspot.com/2008/10/400-mph.html.

Sometimes the false claim was at least somewhat inadvertent. On 17 June 1980 during envelope expansion with a full load of research instrumentation and no particular attention paid to drag reduction, the Bell XV-15 tiltrotor research aircraft achieved a measured true air speed in level flight of 301 knots as first calculated by engineering.

Much celebration ensured and a press release immediately issued by marketing. As it turned out, the initial calculation failed to take into account the correction required on the outside air temperature measurement, understandably because it is negligible at the speeds that helicopters normally achieve. When recomputed correctly, the actual speed was a few knots less than 300. Bell management chose not to update the number since it had already been promulgated worldwide. In any event, the milestone did not have the expected impact because 301 knots—while roughly twice that of a helicopter not tricked out like the HSS-2—was half that achievable by a jet-powered VTOL like the Harrier. Not until the XV-15 flew at the Paris Air Show in 1981 and it was subsequently flown by guest pilots did the operational benefit of the tiltrotor concept become apparent to prospective customers.

Friday, February 15, 2013

COD Redux

Carrier Onboard Delivery (COD) is normally provided by an airplane that utilizes the arrested landing gear and catapult to arrive and depart. Shore-based helicopters sometimes deliver or pickup personnel and packages when a carrier is not too far away. Because of the drag of the rotor, helicopters have half the range or less of an airplane of the same size. (These CH-53Es are actually landing on Truman to refuel on their way to Kearsarge.)

The tiltrotor is an aircraft that combines the hover capability of the helicopter with the speed and range of a turboprop airplane. The Bell-Boeing V-22 is the first operational tiltrotor, initially assigned to Marine Corps for troop transport and logistics. Recently, VMX-22 conducted an evaluation aboard Bush of the V-22 as a supplement to the existing Grumman C-2 COD capability. One benefit is that the V-22 does not require the use of the catapult and arresting gear so it can takeoff and land regardless of the status of the spot aboard the carrier or existing flight operations.

Following the evaluation, the V-22s were loaded with Marine Corps and Navy personnel and their personal equipment for the flight back to the Marine Corps Base at Quantico, Virginia.

This is a picture taken a few years ago of V-22s in airplane mode used for enroute cruise.

This were not the first evaluation of the V-22 aboard an aircraft carrier. This picture was taken of a V-22 aboard Bush in March 2012, when night operations were part of the testing. An at-sea evaluation has also been accomplished aboard Truman.

Tuesday, January 22, 2013

It Never Fails


After I finally decide that I've found everything I'm going to find about a subject and my monograph on it is published, somebody shows up with something. In this case, it was the F7U-1 and Rick Koehnen. He was looking through the photos on the Flicker photostream of the San Diego Air & Space Museum (http://www.flickr.com/photos/sdasmarchives/) and saw some photos of an F7U-1 in flight.
San Diego Air & Space Museum

I had guessed from the following picture that the F7U-1 assigned to Pt Mugu had participated in an air show, based on the fact that there were Air Force Thunderbird F-84Gs in the background.

I'm certain of that now. Another picture taken at the same event shows the Point Mugu markings on the fin.
San Diego Air & Space Museum

The venue was probably the first air show to be held at NAS Miramar, California in October 1953, based on the fact that the Thunderbirds had just come into being in June. The diamond formation of F9F-6s in the air with the F7U-1 are the Blue Angels.

For much, much more on the F7U-1 and the transition to the F7U-3, buy my monograph that is available from Sprue Brothers (http://store.spruebrothers.com/product_p/gin094.htm), the publisher (http://www.ginterbooks.com/NAVAL/NAVAL.htm), and Specialty Press (http://www.specialtypress.com/vstore/showdetl.cfm?Product_ID=2537&DID=8). See Amazon only for the reviews: http://www.amazon.com/dp/0984611479

Thursday, December 27, 2012

Hellcats on CVEs

The CVE was an escort carrier built, in the beginning, on an oiler or merchant-ship hull. They had the smallest flight decks and slowest top speed of all the U.S. carriers. (See http://thanlont.blogspot.com/2012/12/making-it-harder-than-necessary.html) There were also far more of them commissioned during World War II than any other carrier type.

I had thought that during World War II they 1) only deployed "composite" squadrons and 2) never deployed with F6Fs. It turns out that I was wrong on both counts.

A composite squadron at the time, by the way, was called that because it operated more that one type of airplane, e.g. fighters as well as bombers. They came into being because the small number of airplanes that could be carried by an escort carrier didn't justify the bureaucracy associated with two or three squadrons, an air group commander, etc.

The FM-2 Wildcat was specifically developed for CVE-based VC squadrons. It was lighter and had a more powerful engine than the FM-1. The vertical fin and rudder were increased in size to compensate for the horsepower increase.
 National Archives 80-G-224669

Grumman did a design study in mid-1943 of an F6F-3 modified for operation from CVEs. The "F6F-4" was to be armed with four .50 caliber guns instead of six and have the 75-gallon fuselage fuel tank deleted; the "F6F EX. W.T." was to have a greater wing span. Each wing tip was to be extended two feet and the ailerons moved outboard, with the span increase being split between the ailerons and the flaps by seven inches and 17 inches respectively. The study concluded that the F6F was faster but the FM-2 was smaller and had a lower stall speed and better takeoff performance, making them more suitable for operation from a CVE.

As it turned out, there appear to be many instances of CVEs deploying with Hellcats.

Barnes (CVE-20) reportedly deployed with VF-1 flying F6F Hellcats in November and December 1943. Some of the results were ugly. The pilot was killed in this landing attempt during workups in October. (Note the very unusual variation on the tri-color scheme.)

National Archives 80-G-202611
This one wasn't fatal but still embarrassing for all concerned.

Some Sangamon-class CVEs deployments during World War II were with both a fighter squadron equipped with F6F Hellcats as well as a VT squadron assigned TBMs or a VC squadron operating SBDs and TBMs. The Sangamons (only four were built) were a bit longer and had a bigger hangar deck than the earlier U.S. Navy CVEs. The later Commencement Bay-class CVEs were similar in size and considered big enough and fast enough for Vought F4U Corsair and Grumman AF Guardian operation.

Sunday, December 23, 2012

And Now for Something Completely Different II

In April 1956, a VX-1 crew in a Sikorsky HSS-1 was conducting dipping sonar trials off Key West using Corporal (SS-346) as a target when cockpit instruments indicated that there was a problem with the main transmission. Since a transmission failure in flight was to be avoided at all costs, the pilot, CDR W.F. Culley, prepared to ditch while, I'm guessing, the sonar operator signaled the submarine to surface.

In any event, the submarine did surface and Culley quickly coordinated a plan with its skipper, LCDR E.O. Proctor, to save the helicopter by landing it on the deck aft of the conning tower. The ad hoc helipad was reportedly only two inches wider than the tread of the HSS-1's tires. It was unorthodox and risky but successfully accomplished with LTJG G.D. Ellis Jr out on deck serving as the first helo/submarine LSO.

National Archives 80-G-689826

Securely tied down, the HSS-1 was brought back to Key West and craned off.

National Archives 80-G-689827

Wednesday, December 19, 2012

Grumman A-6 Intruder History

The best history ever written on the A-6 Intruder is by Mark and Rick Morgan:


I'm going to go out on a limb here, since I haven't seen it yet, and say that the second-best book on the A-6 Intruder has just been released:
Note that it's by Rick Morgan who I rely on as a subject matter expert. It's available on Amazon and at a substantial discount.

Plus if you buy this book, you'll help convince a publisher to contract with Rick to do a similar work on the A-3 Skywarrior, which I for one would welcome, and a follow-on that covers the A-6s post-Vietnam.