Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Duck Butt Missions

465 views
Skip to first unread message

Dan

unread,
Jul 6, 2009, 1:38:07 AM7/6/09
to
With GPS available are duck butt missions still flown? The only term I
ever recall was duck butt. I don't even remember if that was the
official term. All I know is they were a crashing bore.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Hal Hanig

unread,
Jul 6, 2009, 5:35:16 AM7/6/09
to

"Dan" <B24...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:Z5g4m.21262$c82....@newsfe08.iad...

Having flown them by the hundreds when I was assigned to the Air Rescue
Service, I don't recall them being referred to as anything but "duck butts".
And yes, they were a bore to us to fly out to a designated site over the
ocean and fly race track patterns around that site sometimes for hours on
end while doing nothing more than transmitting a signal on our radio beacon.
OTOH, I don't imagine that the jet pilot of that day trying to transit the
Atlantic Ocean without anything as grandiose as the still to be invented GPS
thought that it was anything less than a relief to be able to pinpoint his
location over all of that water.

Hal


Dan

unread,
Jul 6, 2009, 10:52:59 AM7/6/09
to
We flew duck butts in Rescue in the 1980s. I only got stuck on one
and that was enough. I'd rather watch paint dry.

Mortimer Schnerd

unread,
Jul 6, 2009, 2:47:05 PM7/6/09
to
Hal Hanig wrote:

> Having flown them by the hundreds when I was assigned to the Air Rescue
> Service, I don't recall them being referred to as anything but "duck butts".
> And yes, they were a bore to us to fly out to a designated site over the
> ocean and fly race track patterns around that site sometimes for hours on
> end while doing nothing more than transmitting a signal on our radio beacon.
> OTOH, I don't imagine that the jet pilot of that day trying to transit the
> Atlantic Ocean without anything as grandiose as the still to be invented GPS
> thought that it was anything less than a relief to be able to pinpoint his
> location over all of that water.


Quit yer whining. All that endless flying kept you off the streets and
out of trouble. You have to find the good where you can.

Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerd at carolina.rr.com

WaltBJ

unread,
Jul 6, 2009, 6:07:52 PM7/6/09
to
They may have been boring for you but it was comforting to know
somebody was out there while we were flying fighters across the pond.
And, hey, at least you could get up, stretch, and hit the john . . .
Walt BJ

Dan

unread,
Jul 6, 2009, 6:12:59 PM7/6/09
to

Next you'll be telling us you couldn't stretch out in a bunk for a
nap. Well, I'll have you know we only had 3 bunks on our HC-130. I won't
even get into how crowded the plotter's table got during a game of hearts.

WaltBJ

unread,
Jul 6, 2009, 10:47:30 PM7/6/09
to

But did you ever realize while you were still heading back home we
were already on the ground guzzling cool ones?
Walt BJ

Dan

unread,
Jul 6, 2009, 11:05:06 PM7/6/09
to

Y'know, Walt, I detect a distinct lack of sympathy for our plight.
Then again, neither of us would enjoy flying those missions again. I
still have a couple of flight suits I never sewed insignia on nor worn.
They don't fit now. My theory is they shrank.

Hal Hanig

unread,
Jul 6, 2009, 11:38:11 PM7/6/09
to

"Dan" <B24...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:KFu4m.22137$Qk7....@newsfe22.iad...

SA-16s and HC-54s don't have bunks.

Hal


Hal Hanig

unread,
Jul 6, 2009, 11:43:15 PM7/6/09
to

"WaltBJ" <walt...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:4329b6f2-76d9-4a93...@32g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...

We sure as hell did in my day. When we were headed back to the barn, we'd
be lucky if we could coax 140 mph out of Slobbering Albert is a long shallow
descent. OTOH, we could land and take off on water in our 90 mph airborne
speedboats, which was a helluva lot of fun and more than any of you guys
could do.
(^v^))))))))

Hal


Hal Hanig

unread,
Jul 6, 2009, 11:45:37 PM7/6/09
to

"Dan" <B24...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:lXy4m.9380$Xs4....@newsfe11.iad...

All of my left over uniforms went under water during Hurricane Fran and, by
the time I got back to them, they had reallllly shrunk!

Hal


Ron

unread,
Jul 7, 2009, 1:35:06 AM7/7/09
to

Why didnt the HC-54 have any? We did in the C-54E.

Dan

unread,
Jul 7, 2009, 2:08:16 AM7/7/09
to

Did you have heat at least?

Two of our bunks were under the wing against the left wall. The
motion of the aircraft would rock one to sleep.

Dan

unread,
Jul 7, 2009, 2:09:31 AM7/7/09
to
Oh, they could land on water. Taking off was another matter.

Hal Hanig

unread,
Jul 7, 2009, 5:51:20 AM7/7/09
to

"Dan" <B24...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:WCB4m.16085$iU7....@newsfe01.iad...

> Hal Hanig wrote:
>> "Dan" <B24...@aol.com> wrote in message
>> news:KFu4m.22137$Qk7....@newsfe22.iad...
>>> WaltBJ wrote:
>>>> They may have been boring for you but it was comforting to know
>>>> somebody was out there while we were flying fighters across the pond.
>>>> And, hey, at least you could get up, stretch, and hit the john . . .
>>>> Walt BJ
>>>>
>>> Next you'll be telling us you couldn't stretch out in a bunk for a
>>> nap. Well, I'll have you know we only had 3 bunks on our HC-130. I won't
>>> even get into how crowded the plotter's table got during a game of
>>> hearts.
>>>
>>> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>>
>> SA-16s and HC-54s don't have bunks.
>>
>> Hal
>
> Did you have heat at least?

Yeah....we did have cockpit and cabin heat.

Hal Hanig

unread,
Jul 7, 2009, 5:53:21 AM7/7/09
to

"Ron" <nmfir...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ba7a95f3-9ed1-4a5a...@c1g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...

Possibly they did away with them when they installed the observation
blisters on both sides of the cabin. Just a WAG .....I really don't
remember.

Hal


WaltBJ

unread,
Jul 7, 2009, 10:48:42 PM7/7/09
to
About two hours out those parachute legs straps start to grow. They're
maybe 1/8" thick to begin with but about 4 hours out they've turned
into 2 by 4s. FWIW it's worth the bloody F4 doesn't have a relief
tube. One answer is built-in if you're wearing a poopy suit. Otherwise
a coke can or empty thermos comes in handy. If you haven't got
anything like that, well, just grit your teeth (can't cross your
legs!) for the next 6 hours. In the F4 there is another guy along so
you can swap flying the beast - even the navs in the back seat have
learned enough to stay with the formation. Just closing ones eyes for
fifteen minutes or so is like a 3-day pass. Once on the ground we had
to wait 15 minutes or so for taxi clearance so we took turns holding
the brakes while the other guy stood up and massaged and scratched his
poor flattened butt. Once parked the first guy up the ladder usually
has a cold one or two along. That goes down quick! Next stop the
latrine - oh, heaven!
FWIW the worst trip TAC had was George to Turkey, about 14 hours. I
missed that one. But Homestead to Hickam was one hell of a leg. 11
hours and 9 refuelings. Next leg a tanker aborted and the remaining
two tanks gave us all they had and they landed at Wake - then 900
miles onto Guam trusting the INS. Happiness was seeing islands come on
the scope at 200 miles. I have a lot of respect for the F111 guys out
of England who hit Libya in the middle of a 12 hour mission - they
couldn't fly straight down there because our 'allies' wouldn't allow
their airspace to be used. B1s, B2s and B52s have flown longer
missions but at least they can get out of their seats, stretch, and
use the john.
Walt BJ

Dan

unread,
Jul 7, 2009, 11:21:21 PM7/7/09
to

I never did understand why F-4E didn't have a parking brake like real
airplanes. I never did like holding brakes on them until chocks.

We once had an H-60 fly from Eglin to Kirtland (I think) non stop. I
forget how long it took, somewhere on the order of 9 - 11 hours, and I'm
glad I missed that one. Those things were made for midgets. I preferred
H-3 and H-53.

kent...@comcast.net

unread,
May 25, 2018, 2:16:04 PM5/25/18
to
The SC 54 had two bunks one on each side each They were each over a fuel tank.


Ken
0 new messages