Coincidentally have this week been "returning again" to the Skywarrior - now have it working well in P3DV4. One of Ed Heinemann's great designs. Don't mean to hijack this thread but with this rare veteran's discussion I am curious to know what altitudes ECM in SEA flew, in particular the EA-3, and nearer the end of war EA--6B aircraft? Any other info on ECM mission profiles?Also a fan of the RA-5C which I have read in Vietnam flew feet dry at 7-8,000 feet in light AB (to reduce smoke) usually with an F-4 on its wing.Thanks!
EKA-3 "Whale"
- Thread starter Cowboy1968
- Start date
PhantomTweak
Members +
I hope the Phantom flying wing was in AB 1 too, or there would have been SMOKE!
We all know how much the Phantom smoked. A LOT!
Good ol' Smokin' Joe
Pat☺
We all know how much the Phantom smoked. A LOT!
Good ol' Smokin' Joe
Pat☺
Mike71
SOH-CM-2025
Sorry, but I do not know to much about ECM profiles, but most likely very target - subject oriented. maybe some web searches might reveal some sea stories.
The RA-5C was a magnificent airplane - a true "STAR SHIP", and probably the most beautiful airplane I have ever flown formation on; truly awesome to look at from any angle.
Unfortunately, they suffered incredible losses over the North (something like 18 out of 60 as I recall). Flying pre-and post strike missions required a run in at high speed and low altitude, full burner over the target, snapping photos the whole way, many times at night, popping flash bulbs like popcorn. The Phantom went in only on the first part of the run so the Viggie would not get jumped by a MiG. The RA-5C crew was too busy setting up their photo gear and route to be pre-occupied with looking for enemy aircraft. They would both go in toward the coast in basic engine, but once they approached "'Injun' Territory" the F-4 stayed back, the Viggie hit burner and headed down hill toward its photo run. Coming back out across the coast it would usually join up with it's F-4 escort again. often an A-4/A-7/A-3 tanker would be orbiting between the Carrier and the coast to give the returning flight some gas if needed (usually did!).
Tweaker is right - an RA-5 and F-4 flying together in basic engine is a hell of a lot of smoke, especially at lower altitudes!
The Viggie was probably the most difficult plane we had to operate from a carrier. It had very advanced, but analog, systems that were maintenance intensive. It was very large, heavy, and making safe carrier approaches was no easy task. getting slow and developing too high a sink rate was the typical cause of several fatal "ramp strikes". It certainly was not underpowered - it was fast as hell. An F-4 could never keep up with it in full burner.
However, like any high performance airplane flying in landing configuration at critically low speed, just a little deceleration results in a rapidly developing sink rate that takes a large power addition to overcome, and the pilot starts overcorrecting and everything goes to hell. he starts getting fast and high on the ball, sucks too much power, starts to get slow and settling, etc. The LSO is helping on the radio, the pilot (and his RAN!) are sweating bullets, the ship's Captain on the bridge, the Air Boss and squadron CO are sucking up their seat cushions watching all this as it transpires. The Flight Deck Chief is praying for it all to just come out OK, he only needs a couple of more years to retire. At night, a bunch of young sailors working the various jobs on deck are thinking "what the hell did I get myself in to?? I could be at the drive in with my girlfriend, rather than risking getting killed out here!".
Everyone held their breath and watched the PLAT when an RA-5C was on final at night. In my day, the very few newly designated Aviators who went to RA-5s were in the top of their classes. Likely they wanted to go to F-4s or F-8s, but as is always the case in the military, the order is "needs of the service/training performance/personal request".
The RA-5C was a magnificent airplane - a true "STAR SHIP", and probably the most beautiful airplane I have ever flown formation on; truly awesome to look at from any angle.
Unfortunately, they suffered incredible losses over the North (something like 18 out of 60 as I recall). Flying pre-and post strike missions required a run in at high speed and low altitude, full burner over the target, snapping photos the whole way, many times at night, popping flash bulbs like popcorn. The Phantom went in only on the first part of the run so the Viggie would not get jumped by a MiG. The RA-5C crew was too busy setting up their photo gear and route to be pre-occupied with looking for enemy aircraft. They would both go in toward the coast in basic engine, but once they approached "'Injun' Territory" the F-4 stayed back, the Viggie hit burner and headed down hill toward its photo run. Coming back out across the coast it would usually join up with it's F-4 escort again. often an A-4/A-7/A-3 tanker would be orbiting between the Carrier and the coast to give the returning flight some gas if needed (usually did!).
Tweaker is right - an RA-5 and F-4 flying together in basic engine is a hell of a lot of smoke, especially at lower altitudes!
The Viggie was probably the most difficult plane we had to operate from a carrier. It had very advanced, but analog, systems that were maintenance intensive. It was very large, heavy, and making safe carrier approaches was no easy task. getting slow and developing too high a sink rate was the typical cause of several fatal "ramp strikes". It certainly was not underpowered - it was fast as hell. An F-4 could never keep up with it in full burner.
However, like any high performance airplane flying in landing configuration at critically low speed, just a little deceleration results in a rapidly developing sink rate that takes a large power addition to overcome, and the pilot starts overcorrecting and everything goes to hell. he starts getting fast and high on the ball, sucks too much power, starts to get slow and settling, etc. The LSO is helping on the radio, the pilot (and his RAN!) are sweating bullets, the ship's Captain on the bridge, the Air Boss and squadron CO are sucking up their seat cushions watching all this as it transpires. The Flight Deck Chief is praying for it all to just come out OK, he only needs a couple of more years to retire. At night, a bunch of young sailors working the various jobs on deck are thinking "what the hell did I get myself in to?? I could be at the drive in with my girlfriend, rather than risking getting killed out here!".
Everyone held their breath and watched the PLAT when an RA-5C was on final at night. In my day, the very few newly designated Aviators who went to RA-5s were in the top of their classes. Likely they wanted to go to F-4s or F-8s, but as is always the case in the military, the order is "needs of the service/training performance/personal request".
Bjoern
worst developer ever
Were the losses combat related or operational?
Great writeup, as usual!
I think the RA-5 would have benefitted from variable geometry wings, not only for better low speed handling, but also in terms of looks.
- E:
Here's a great A3J training video. It sure was space age technology back in the day.
But those engine gauges on the left hand side...oh dear!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dwtO38HmlM
Great writeup, as usual!
I think the RA-5 would have benefitted from variable geometry wings, not only for better low speed handling, but also in terms of looks.
- E:
Here's a great A3J training video. It sure was space age technology back in the day.
But those engine gauges on the left hand side...oh dear!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dwtO38HmlM
Mike71
SOH-CM-2025
There were 91 total RA-5Cs, some rebuilt from original A3Js. 60 deployed to Vietnam at various times, in 4 plane dets. They only operated from large deck Carriers, so their exposure was less than typical VA and VF squadrons (the numerous ESSEX 27 Charlies used RF-8Gs). Also remember, the cold war in the Atlantic Fleet required their deployed presence as well. There were 18 combat losses. Several other losses were operational accidents.
As you see in the A3J film, the RA-5C had much improved looks due to the streamlined dorsal hump, which added fuel.
Engine gauges on the left side of the instrument panel, forward of the throttles, is typical for single pilot military jets in my experience.
As to variable sweep - this idea was in the works for many years, but requires a heavy carry-through wing center section structure. Eventually it was refined in the TFX/F-111/F-14 program, but we must remember that the A3J was developed in the era of Hudsons and Studebakers!
As you see in the A3J film, the RA-5C had much improved looks due to the streamlined dorsal hump, which added fuel.
Engine gauges on the left side of the instrument panel, forward of the throttles, is typical for single pilot military jets in my experience.
As to variable sweep - this idea was in the works for many years, but requires a heavy carry-through wing center section structure. Eventually it was refined in the TFX/F-111/F-14 program, but we must remember that the A3J was developed in the era of Hudsons and Studebakers!
Bjoern
worst developer ever
Well, the recce "canoe" below the fuselage negated that advantage a bit.
Still, I find the large wing a bit off-putting, but that's purely subjective.
F-4s, F-16s and just about most other planes have them on the right. Probably because the pilot in command sits on the left in twin-seaters. Hence my surprise.
Fair enough.
Bjoern
worst developer ever
Apparently not as much as you think. Take a look at this:
http://www.antsairplanes.com/screenshots/t28d/BC03.jpg
https://www.cybermodeler.com/aircraft/f-8/images/natops_f-8a_02.jpg
https://www.avsim.com/pages/0506/F4D/007.jpg
http://a4skyhawk.info/sites/default/files/images-a4-unknown/a4-vc1-a4b-cockpit.jpg
It seems like the Navy air arm tried really, really hard to be more than the shipborne USAF prior to ~1960? I can't find any aircraft with left-hand engine indicators afterward.
MrZippy
SOH-CM-2025
Very true, Mike. Sara's a coral reef somewhere off the Atlantic coast. They didn't call her "The sucking 60 from Dixie" for nothing
I did get one flighton one of our Whales. We were flying what we called "spins". The whale was the first launch and flew up to tanking altitude to top off the returning
Phantoms, Corsairs, and Intruders so they had enough in case of botlers while trying to land. The whale landed at the end of that recovery and gassed up
for the next launch.
Charlie
Mike71
SOH-CM-2025
Yeah, SARA got screwed due to poor funding in the FORRESTAL Class SLEP program, had lots of propulsion problems, many because of poor work in SLEP in the old Philly Navy Yard. She had some good COs though, later VADM Bob Dunn being the best of them IMHO.
That type of tanker cycle was also referred to as a "YOYO" tanker as well. Problem at night, for the last recovery, was occasionally the pilot would get tired / a little rattled and start boltering himself. SOOOooo - who saves the tanker?? Pull one out of the pack, man up and shoot it off the waist in the middle of a recovery (the bow cats are normally clobbered during a recovery). Done it a couple of times myself. Of course I NEVER boltered (wink), but many of my close personal friends occasionally did.
That type of tanker cycle was also referred to as a "YOYO" tanker as well. Problem at night, for the last recovery, was occasionally the pilot would get tired / a little rattled and start boltering himself. SOOOooo - who saves the tanker?? Pull one out of the pack, man up and shoot it off the waist in the middle of a recovery (the bow cats are normally clobbered during a recovery). Done it a couple of times myself. Of course I NEVER boltered (wink), but many of my close personal friends occasionally did.
Bjoern
worst developer ever
Since it happens to be on my second monitor at the moment, here's that AAR matroshka. And I found where I originally got it from:
https://zona-militar.com/foros/threads/fotos-inéditas-y-difíciles-fotos.9997/page-152
(Kudos to the original photographer. Hard to get such a gread shot.)
https://zona-militar.com/foros/threads/fotos-inéditas-y-difíciles-fotos.9997/page-152
(Kudos to the original photographer. Hard to get such a gread shot.)
