Squadron's CAG plane
Ren=?iso-8859-1?Q?=E9 Pelletier
Send respond at rpe...@icrdl.net
Thank's
Rene Pelletier
Dave Barak
<rpe...@icrdl.net>?= wrote:
Each squadron on an aircraft carrier (I don't know if the Marines do this)
have a CAG aircraft, which is the lowest numbered in the squadron (the
CAG's S3 would be 700, also known as Nuts). It's got his name painted on
it, and is usually the airplane with the most attention paid to it's
appearance.
Dave
Dave Barak
Dave's Cultural Wasteland
http://www.flinet.com/~barak
Watch this space for "Derision '96"
Dave McOwen
>Each squadron on an aircraft carrier (I don't know if the Marines do >this) have a CAG aircraft, which is the lowest numbered in the squadron
I've seen several Marine aircraft, mostly A-4s, with CAG paint schemes.
I don't know if this is standard procedure, though.
-Dave
Ogden Johnson III
When a Marine squadron joins a carrier air wing and embarks, it adopts
the wing's numbering and paint schemes, which includes a CAG n00 aircraft.
At home base, the aircraft retains the squadrons standard paint scheme,
but is numbered 00 (double-nuts) and is lettered with the Marine Aircraft
Group (MAG) CO's name.
JMcea
squadron's aircraft.
jlmce
MICOMA
writes:
>In the early 60's, before CAG fame, double nuts was the CO of the
>squadron's aircraft.
Unless a great number of published photos are incorrect, a double nuts
aircraft was indeed a CAG bird. The squadron CO would have his name
painted on the bird with a 101, 201, etc.
Clearly marked on planes with the double nuts is the name of the CAG on
several published photos.
Mike Weeks MIC...@aol.com
Dave Barak
> In this book I've got, there is one pic of a VF-74 F-4S (marked: CAG:
> Capt Bruce Bremner) and another pic of a VS-30 S-3A (marked: CAG: Bruce
> Bremner). How usual is that? I mean, I've read somewhere that " the CAG,
> who flies as many as seven different types of aircraft" or something to
> that effect, but on the same cruise? As diverse missions as that? Anyone
> wanna shed some light on this?
>
The designation of a CAG aircraft is basically just ceremonial - CAGs
don't routinely fly missions while on a cruise. Too much paperwork, I
guess. <G>
Paal Naess
Capt Bruce Bremner) and another pic of a VS-30 S-3A (marked: CAG: Bruce
Bremner). How usual is that? I mean, I've read somewhere that " the CAG,
who flies as many as seven different types of aircraft" or something to
that effect, but on the same cruise? As diverse missions as that? Anyone
wanna shed some light on this?
MICOMA
If the CAG has been "checked out" by the appropriate FRS in any particular
aircraft type flown by the air wing, then he can indeed fly that
particular aircraft type - as I understand it.
Know of a CAG (a former F-4 driver) who got checked out in the SH-3 of the
HS unit attached to his CVW, and that he was at least involved in one
flight while on cruise. What I don't know is if he flew from the left or
right seat.<g>
I also will assume that if a bird the CAG is flying is not one that he has
much time in, then the mission he goes on won't be of a serious nature,
and perhaps only during the day.
It's also tradition that all squadrons in the air wing will have one bird
marked-up as a CAG bird - 00 or later; 100, 200, 300, etc, and in the good
old days of colorful Navy aircraft, the colors representing the various
squadrons would be displayed in some fashion on each CAG bird. Those were
the days for great photo shots.<g>
Mike Weeks MIC...@aol.com
Chris Douglas
Adm. Paul Gillcrest's book "Feet Wet" has several later chapters on what his
duties as a CAG entailed. Not only did he fly all the planes he was
qualified for, he'd fudge the rules at times to ensure he got some cockpit
time in other deployed aircraft (though not necessarily as the pilot).
It's a good book anyway. It will certainly give you a heightened
appreciation for the dangers and complexities of night carrier landings...
--
-----------------------------------------------------
Chris Douglas - cdou...@origin.ea.com
Production Designer/Animator - Origin Systems, Inc.
-----------------------------------------------------
Opinions expressed are my own.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
You have escaped from it, but it is there, always following you.
It is there, in your heart and your mind, in the very depths and
recesses of your being. You have covered it up, escaped, run
away; but it is there. And the mind must experience it like a
purgation by fire. --Krishnamurti.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Cole Pierce
|> In article <4jq0j9$s...@hasle.sn.no>, Paal Naess <pn...@oslonett.no> wrote:
|>
|> > In this book I've got, there is one pic of a VF-74 F-4S (marked: CAG:
|> > Capt Bruce Bremner) and another pic of a VS-30 S-3A (marked: CAG: Bruce
|> > Bremner). How usual is that? I mean, I've read somewhere that " the CAG,
|> > who flies as many as seven different types of aircraft" or something to
|> > that effect, but on the same cruise? As diverse missions as that? Anyone
|> > wanna shed some light on this?
|> >
|> don't routinely fly missions while on a cruise. Too much paperwork, I
|> guess. <G>
|>
|> Dave
|>
|> Dave Barak
|>
|> Dave's Cultural Wasteland
|> http://www.flinet.com/~barak
|> Watch this space for "Derision '96"
CAGs "don't routinely fly missions while on a cruise"???? Is this another
example of armchair bullshit??
Gun One
John Weiss
<pn...@oslonett.no> wrote:
> In this book I've got, there is one pic of a VF-74 F-4S (marked: CAG:
> Capt Bruce Bremner) and another pic of a VS-30 S-3A (marked: CAG: Bruce
> Bremner). How usual is that? I mean, I've read somewhere that " the
> CAG, who flies as many as seven different types of aircraft" or
> something to that effect, but on the same cruise? As diverse missions as
> that? Anyone wanna shed some light on this?
>
> Paal... again
>
Each squadron has a "CAG" plane. The CAG may actually fly 3 or 4 different
ones...
--
John Weiss
Bare Bones BBS, Seattle, WA
206-368-7672
"Woody"
Regarding CAG planes...
In most airwings the 00 airplane in each squadron is painted with CAG's
name on it as a show of respect. After all, CAG signs all the squadron
CO's fitness reports.
CAG's will typically fly at least two aircraft in the air wing. If the
CAG is a pilot he typically doesn't have time to fly more, but it is
still legal for him to fly missions from the co-pilot position in other
aircraft. If he is an NFO he may be more liberal with the amount of
aircraft he crews. (I use the pronoun "he," but "she" will most
certainly apply soon.)
Regarding CAG flight time, they _DO_ fly actual combat missions. Part
of leadership is leading from the front, and these aviators are weeded
out of the best of the best.
JMcea
side of "600" and the CO's name is on the left. The XO was 601 and the
rest went by the pilot's seniority (I was on 609 with a LT). There were
no CAG birds up to at least 1963. Maybe someone knows when the practice
started. Also remember, that CAG was a CDR O-5 then, the role of the CAG
has been altered.
jlmce
JMcea
to check out in all aircraft in his air group (CAG-8). I flew with him in
the A-3 after his check rides. He is the one who boltered three times in
the A-1E and the ship's CO radioed "Hold what you got CAG, and I'll back
her down under you!"
jlmce
MICOMA
writes:
>Sorry, in 1961 I was B/N for the CO of VAH-5 and my name is on the right
>side of "600" and the CO's name is on the left. The XO was 601 and the
>rest went by the pilot's seniority (I was on 609 with a LT).
Don't be sorry, you were there, I wasn't. It does however sound like
Heavy Five did not follow the "normal" practice of having their "x00" bird
made up with the CAG's name. By any chance do you have photos?
>There were no CAG birds up to at least 1963. Maybe someone knows when
the >practice started.
A "not-too expensive book"; "USN Aircraft Carrier Air Units, Vol
1(1946-56) by Duane Kasulka provides some help here - plenty of CAG birds
(either showing "00" or "x00" series) on pages 16 & 17. Comments made in
various photo captions are: "...The double digit method of numbering CAG
a/c was introduced in 1948...The usage of 'double nuts' (00) was normally
carried on an aircraft from the squadron that the CAG originally flew
with...". Some birds shown - F6F-5 with "CAG3" on side (CDR L. M. Bauer)
in 1946; F8F-1 with "100" of VF-19A for CDR H.E. Cook Jr. of CVG-19 in
June 1947; FJ-3 with "100" of VF-24 for CVG-2 (with multi-colored tail to
boot); A4D-1 with "00" of VA-72 for CVG-7 in late 1956.
In Duane's Vol 2(1957-1963) there are additional photos of CAG birds in
photos with caption dates of prior to 1963.
On the "expensive book" side, there's John Elliott's "USN & USMC Aircraft
Color Guide (Vols 2 & 3). In Vol 2 (1940-49) page 134, referencing BuAer
Aircraft Circular Letter #156-46, "...CAG a/c could be marked 100, 200,
300, or 400 depending on the type of a/c." assigned.)
I guess this is overkill, but it's just a sample of the level of info
that's out in the public arena. I won't even go into the photos which
have been published in The Hook magazine over the years.<g>
Mike Weeks MIC...@aol.com
Anthony DeBoer
> [ snip ]
>Each squadron has a "CAG" plane. The CAG may actually fly 3 or 4 different
>ones...
Does anybody else fly these aircraft when the CAG isn't using them?
Especially on an Alpha Strike when multiple squadrons are trying to
get all aircraft airborne?
Also, with multiple squadrons having the same aircraft type embarked,
does each provide a CAG bird? Having for example a single CAG F/A-18
instead of one from each squadron would seem to be more economical.
--
Anthony DeBoer http://www.onramp.ca/~adb/
a...@herboid.reptiles.org (here)
a...@geac.com (work) #include "std.disclaimer"
MICOMA
(Anthony DeBoer) writes:
>Does anybody else fly these aircraft when the CAG isn't using them?
You bet. One example of note; Randy Cunningham & Willie Driscoll got
their 3rd, 4th, & 5th MiG on 10 May 1972 in the VF-96 CAG bird - NG100
(BuNo 155800).
>Especially on an Alpha Strike when multiple squadrons are trying to
>get all aircraft airborne?
>
>Also, with multiple squadrons having the same aircraft type embarked,
>does each provide a CAG bird?
That is normal practice.
>Having for example a single CAG F/A-18 instead of one from each squadron
would seem to be more economical.
More economical then what? It's just one bird in each squadron with a
MODEX of, say NG100. The bird is still part of the squadron count - it's
just got a different side number, and as I said before, more color (in the
"good ole" days). There's also unit pride involved with a
specially-marked bird.
Mike Weeks MIC...@aol.com
Buzz Nau
>John Weiss <jrw...@seanet.com> wrote:
>> [ snip ]
>>Each squadron has a "CAG" plane. The CAG may actually fly 3 or 4 different
>>ones...
>Does anybody else fly these aircraft when the CAG isn't using them?
>Especially on an Alpha Strike when multiple squadrons are trying to
>get all aircraft airborne?
The CAG bird for each squadron is like any other when it comes to the
flight schedule. The only time I can think of it being singled out is
if it was the hanger queen at the time ;-).
>Also, with multiple squadrons having the same aircraft type embarked,
>does each provide a CAG bird? Having for example a single CAG F/A-18
>instead of one from each squadron would seem to be more economical.
The naming scheme for squadron aircraft is superficial. Chances are,
when the CAG does fly with your squadron its in a plane other than
double nuts.
Buzz
========================================================
Evan "Buzz" Nau
University of Michigan - Medical School Administration
buz...@umich.edu / http://www-personal.umich.edu/~buzznau/
========================================================
Shemyadog
writes:
>>Having for example a single CAG F/A-18 instead of one from each squadron
>would seem to be more economical.
>
>
I think there might be something of a misunderstanding of CAG birds and of
the names on the Aircraft in general. The CAG birds are not reserved for
the CAG or anyone else. Each squadron has more pilots than it has
aircraft. In general, seniority determines who gets his name on an
airplane, with x00being the CAG, x01the skipper, x02 being the XO.
(insome squadrons where the skipper is a pilot and the XO an NFO, or vice
versa, I have seen both names on the same Aircraft, but I don't think this
is normal practice.) In practice, what aircraft a pilot actually flies is
dependent on maintenance status, deck spotting and a variety ofother
factors. A past department head of mine, an ex F-4 driver,l told me that
he almost never flew the airplane that had his name on it.
So, while each squadron has a CAG bird, and squadron pride may keep it it
better shape on average than the other squadron aircraft, it gets flown
regularly by other pilots, and might not ever get flown by the CAG at all
(particularly if its a plane the CAG is not checked out in, say an EA-6B,
S-3, or E-2).
This might be something of a BFO, the CAG birds have been the holdout of
colorfull markings in the midst of a sea of Ghost Grey. Eve they can't
always hold out. Up till the time we deployed with CVW-8 in 87, VF-41 and
VF-84 both had their CAG birds in full color markings. CARGRU 8 ordered
the aircraft repainted in subdued markings just before we deployed. In
understand that as soon as CVW8 moved to the TR, they got the colorful CAG
birds back.
John Weiss
DeBoer <a...@herboid.reptiles.org> wrote:
> John Weiss <jrw...@seanet.com> wrote:
> > [ snip ]
> >Each squadron has a "CAG" plane. The CAG may actually fly 3 or 4
> different ones...
>
> Does anybody else fly these aircraft when the CAG isn't using them?
> Especially on an Alpha Strike when multiple squadrons are trying to
> get all aircraft airborne?
>
NO pilot in the Navy has his "own" plane (except, maybe, the Blue Angels).
CAG doesn't necessarily fly his own plane, even if that one happens to be
available for his launch. Any other squadron pilot can and does routinely fly
any of the squadron planes.
> Also, with multiple squadrons having the same aircraft type embarked,
> does each provide a CAG bird? Having for example a single CAG F/A-18
> instead of one from each squadron would seem to be more economical.
>
There's no "economy" in it. It's a name stenciled on the side of the
airplane, no more.
Mary Shafer
B> a...@herboid.reptiles.org (Anthony DeBoer) wrote:
>John Weiss <jrw...@seanet.com> wrote:
>> [ snip ] Each squadron has a "CAG" plane. The CAG may actually
>>fly 3 or 4 different
>>ones...
>Does anybody else fly these aircraft when the CAG isn't using them?
>Especially on an Alpha Strike when multiple squadrons are trying to
>get all aircraft airborne?
B> The CAG bird for each squadron is like any other when it comes to
B> the flight schedule. The only time I can think of it being singled
B> out is if it was the hanger queen at the time ;-).
I have heard stories, perhaps apocryphal, of USMC O-3s being treated
very nicely when flying a CAG bird, since CAGs are USN O-6s. (For the
readers less familiar with the designation of rank, both the USMC O-3
and the USN O-6 are Captains, but obviously one is of higher rank that
the other.)
Notice also that the "G" in CAG stands for "Wing", as Air Groups were
renamed Air Wings some time ago. Also, the acronym "RAG" denotes the
Fleet Replenishment (?) Squadron, which is what Replacement (?) Air
Groups are now named. There are other examples, from all branches of
the military, of course but I can only think of these two right now.
--
Mary Shafer NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, CA
SR-71 Flying Qualities Lead Engineer Of course I don't speak for NASA
sha...@ferhino.dfrc.nasa.gov DoD #362 KotFR
URL http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/People/Shafer/mary.html
MICOMA
sha...@ferhino.dfrc.nasa.gov (Mary Shafer) writes:
>Notice also that the "G" in CAG stands for "Wing", as Air Groups were
>renamed Air Wings some time ago.
The "G" in CAG stands for Group (commander, air group). The term "CAG" is
a hold over from when the designation CVG (carrier air group) was used and
before (see the thread DCAG in smn). That designation was changed to
CVW(carrier attack air wing) on 20 December 1963. Note that the word
"attack" was not added to the designation. And just to add more confusion
on how the Navy does things, on 1 April 1976 the designation CVW was
changed to carrier air wing, dropping the word "attack". This was done in
recognition of the CVAs having become CVs, and adding the ASW units (HS
and VS) to the CVW.
>Also, the acronym "RAG" denotes the Fleet Replenishment (?) Squadron,
which is >what Replacement (?) Air Groups are now named.
Today, the "correct" term is "FRS" (fleet readiness squadron). The term
"RAG" stood for the two Replacement Air Groups (RCVG-4 & -12) and the
various squadrons which were assigned to the RCVGs. On 20 December 1963
the designations were changed to RCVW. The term RAG is still used for the
most part today to reflect the activities and personnel assignments of
those in an FRS. BTW, RCVW-4 & -12 were disestablished on 1 June 1970.
Mike Weeks MIC...@aol.com
MICOMA
writes:
> The 'nuts'(number 00) birds of several Navy Hornet squadrons are still
>painted "in
>color". I know for a fact that the cag's bird from a couple of Hornet
>squadrons
>(outta Cecil Field) flew in Desert Storm "in color". The amount "of
color",
>however,
>it somewhat limited.... maybe a color or two on the vert. stabs, and
maybe a
>stripe
>of color on the fuselage.
How true, and you added the operative word "somewhat limited". Nothing
close to what had been going on in the late 60's and through the 70's -
the "good ole' days" :-)
Mike Weeks MIC...@aol.com
Doug Brindle
>More economical then what? It's just one bird in each squadron with a
>MODEX of, say NG100. The bird is still part of the squadron count - it's
>just got a different side number, and as I said before, more color (in the
>"good ole" days). There's also unit pride involved with a
>specially-marked bird.
>
MIke,
The 'nuts'(number 00) birds of several Navy Hornet squadrons are still painted "in
color". I know for a fact that the cag's bird from a couple of Hornet squadrons
(outta Cecil Field) flew in Desert Storm "in color". The amount "of color", however,
it somewhat limited.... maybe a color or two on the vert. stabs, and maybe a stripe
of color on the fuselage.
-Doug
Ben Schapiro
This CAG thread has raised two interesting questions: When did the practice
of special CAG aircraft start and what is the eariest CAG aircraft with 00
as a side number?
I've done a little research in my library so this isn't the final answer.
The earliest CAG aircraft I've found is the Ranger's SB2U-1 of 1939 in the
silver and chrome yellow scheme with the green tail of the Ranger with a
diagonal strip under the cockpit of green edged in white. The Yorktown CAG
also used a SB2U-1, but I haven't figured out if it pre or post dates the
SBC described below.
Later(?) CAG aircraft are Curtiss SBC-3s and 4s flown by the Yorktown and
Enterprise air group commanders in 1940. Both a/c are in the chrome yellow
and silver scheme. Instead of a fuselage band there is a diagonal stripe
starting ahead of the cockpit of the CV's color (red - Yorktowm, blue -
Enterprise) trimed in white. The Enterprise's CAG a/c had a blue horizontal
band on each side of the engine cowl and a solid triangle of blue instead of
the wing chevron.
By 1941 the SBCs had been replaced by SBD-2s (at least on the Enterprise)
which were painted in the prewar grey-blue camoflage with (for the
Enterprise) the letters CAG on the upper wing and the lettering COMMANDER
ENTERPRISE GROUP in black below the cockpit and aft.
None of the above aircraft have the now traditional 00 nor any other side
number.
Once the war started there seems to have been a shift to TBFs for CAGs.
Certainly for strike coordinators who need a long loiter time and the extra
eyes for spotting and protection. However by 1944 many CAGs were flying the
Grumman F6F. Cmdr. David McCampbell (AG-15) flew several Hellcats none with
any side numbers. Cmdr. R.E. Riera learned to fly the Hellcat at sea when
transfered to the Hornet as CAG-11. There is a photo of him in a F6F
numbered 52. Other CAGs who flew F6Fs include Lt Cmdr. Ernest W. Wood of
VF-27 (Princeton), and Enterprise CAG W.R. "Killer" Kane (AG-10).
In sum (based on limited info) it looks like the CAGs took aircraft that
best fit their mission requirements of long range/endurance and did not use
CAG specific markings during WWII after 1941.
I do think I have found the earliest 00 aircraft. Several clear and well
documented photos were taken by Cmdr. Charles Kerlee USNR, a member in
Steichen's photographic unit, of a F6F-3 marked 00, in large white numerals,
as part of the Yorktown's air group in October of 1943. Maybe Mr. Weeks can
supply the name of the CAG.
The above info obviously applies only to the 1939-1945 time frame and I'm
willing to be corrected on any of my assumptions.
********************************************************************************
Ben Schapiro Business be...@wpmail.als.ameritech.com
Customer Support Personal scha...@notis.com
URL http://www.als.ameritech.com:80/isc94.htm
Those who fail to study history are doomed to never get the joke.
I am NOT speaking for Ameritech.
MICOMA
scha...@als.ameritech.com (Ben Schapiro) writes:
>Cmdr. David McCampbell (AG-15) flew several Hellcats none with
>any side numbers.
I believe there were three Hellcats he flew, all named "The Minsi, ... II,
... III". One photo of the F6F-3 "Minsi" does not have any numbers as
noted, but the letters "AGC" for Air Group Commander on the small
forward-facing landing gear cover.
>I do think I have found the earliest 00 aircraft. Several clear and well
>documented photos were taken by Cmdr. Charles Kerlee USNR, a member in
>Steichen's photographic unit, of a F6F-3 marked 00, in large white
numerals,
>as part of the Yorktown's air group in October of 1943. Maybe Mr. Weeks
can
>supply the name of the CAG.
Be happy to: CDR James H. Flatley, II - CAG of CVG-5, 1st air group
assigned to Yorktown(CV-10). The photos described were taken I believe
(very minor point<g>) in September '43, during the first Marcus Is. raid,
while Flatley was still CAG.
Great follow-on by Ben.
Mike Weeks MIC...@aol.com
W.E. Nichols
+I've done a little research in my library so this isn't the final answer.
Hi Ben. There probably is no final answer. I just went thru the 83 cruise
book for Ike. There was a couple of x01 birds with the squadron COs name on
it. There was a 700 bird with the Ship's CO on the stbd side. Numbering
and names is probably a function of how bad the squadron wants to "suck up."
As an aside, during the mid sixties, there were no ac on a CVA with an "8"
(as least on the Hawk) in the number. The computer did not deal with 8s.
Might have been the early version of the NTDS.
Nick
W.E. Nichols Sir Francis Drake circumcised the world with a 100 foot clipper
w...@infi.net
MICOMA
Nichols) writes:
>As an aside, during the mid sixties, there were no ac on a CVA with an
"8"
>(as least on the Hawk) in the number. The computer did not deal with
8s.
>Might have been the early version of the NTDS.
It wouldn't be just on the Hawk Nick. As it was told to me, and as much
of it as I recall; no carrier-based tactical a/c side-number was to end in
an "8" or "9" because whatever system (NTDS?) which
registered/monitored/controlled/whatever? the a/c based on the
side-number, was based on the octal system.
I have no idea if that is true today, but was into the 70's.
Mike Weeks MIC...@aol.com
W.E. Nichols
+In article <3167ccf8...@allnews.infi.net>, w...@infi.net (W.E.
+Nichols) writes:
+
+>As an aside, during the mid sixties, there were no ac on a CVA with an
+"8"
+>(as least on the Hawk) in the number. The computer did not deal with
+8s.
+>Might have been the early version of the NTDS.
+
+It wouldn't be just on the Hawk Nick. As it was told to me, and as much
+of it as I recall; no carrier-based tactical a/c side-number was to end in
+an "8" or "9" because whatever system (NTDS?) which
+registered/monitored/controlled/whatever? the a/c based on the
+side-number, was based on the octal system.
+
+I have no idea if that is true today, but was into the 70's.
I had to limit it to Hawk, personal knowledge. I think the "8" and "9"
applied to anywhere in the side number. This might have propagated the 012,
013 side numbers. 100 and 200s were usually fighters, 3 and 400s light
attack, 500=A-6s; the others for the cats and dogs.
Lindblad
show as an IFF squawk on CV/ATC screens...aka emergency is 7700...
Blad
CJ Martin
>In article <3167ccf8...@allnews.infi.net>, w...@infi.net (W.E.
>
>>As an aside, during the mid sixties, there were no ac on a CVA with an
>>(as least on the Hawk) in the number. The computer did not deal with
>>Might have been the early version of the NTDS.
>
>
>
It remains true today, due to the limitations of the current IFF system in use.
This system uses base-8 numbering (octal), thus the digits '8' and '9' are not
available.
As a aside, my old outfit found several hulks of those little 'Cushman' type
meter maid looking vehicles in salvage and rebuilt one complete one from these
hulks. It was painted in the light ghost gray, and carried our star and
lightning bolt tail insignia. Several phony, but authentic looking 'warnings'
and such were also added. The number '209' was assigned to our little vehicle;
those of you that were in Oceana during the late 80's will remember her. It was
a very useful thing to have around, as at that time we were in hanger 200 and it
was a good hike out to the line.
Little 209 even had a kill marking painted on her...following a unfortunate
mishap involving the CO's brand new Trans Am and a distracted Maintenance Chief
(who happened to be driving 209 at the time). Afterwards, we used to joke with
this same CPO (now a LDO LT) that he needed only four more kills to be a Trans
Am Ace...
CJ
----------
..Former Tomcat Tech, Ex-Starfighter (VF-33),
now CV-based TACAIR Reliability and Maintainability...
My opinions are my own!
Anytime, Baby!
JMcea
unfurled after a refueling exercixe with a DD, "shove off Coxswain". He
was colorful in 1961, but there were no CAG birds in all of COMHATWINONE,
all A-3 600's were lettered for the CO of the squadron; in CAG-8, all
double nuts were the skipper of the squadron. No CAG birds there, or on
the FDR, the otehr ship I am familiar with in 1960-63.
jlmce
Buzz Nau
>As a aside, my old outfit found several hulks of those little 'Cushman' type
>meter maid looking vehicles in salvage and rebuilt one complete one from these
>hulks. It was painted in the light ghost gray, and carried our star and
>lightning bolt tail insignia. Several phony, but authentic looking 'warnings'
>and such were also added. The number '209' was assigned to our little vehicle;
>those of you that were in Oceana during the late 80's will remember her. It was
>a very useful thing to have around, as at that time we were in hanger 200 and it
>was a good hike out to the line.
A lot of the pilots in Atsugi had their cars painted in squadron
colors complete with warning labels and such. Cars over there were
hand downs from people shipping back to the states. I remember I payed
$500 for my car and sold it three laters for $500. Sorry I don't
remember any of the side numbers ;-).
Chris Douglas
>
> In article <4jq0j9$s...@hasle.sn.no>, Paal Naess <pn...@oslonett.no> wrote:
>
> > In this book I've got, there is one pic of a VF-74 F-4S (marked: CAG:
> > Capt Bruce Bremner) and another pic of a VS-30 S-3A (marked: CAG: Bruce
> > Bremner). How usual is that? I mean, I've read somewhere that " the CAG,
> > who flies as many as seven different types of aircraft" or something to
> > that effect, but on the same cruise? As diverse missions as that? Anyone
> > wanna shed some light on this?
> >
> don't routinely fly missions while on a cruise. Too much paperwork, I
> guess. <G>
>
> Dave
Unless this has changed since the early 70's, when Paul Gillcrest (the author
of "Feet Wet") stopped flying, the above statement is false.
Familiarity with the capabilities and operations of as many of the wing's aircraft
as possible would obviously aid the CAG immensely in his job.
José Herculano
>> The designation of a CAG aircraft is basically just ceremonial - CAGs
>> don't routinely fly missions while on a cruise. Too much paperwork, I
>> guess. <G>
>>
>> Dave
>
>Unless this has changed since the early 70's, when Paul Gillcrest (the author
>of "Feet Wet") stopped flying, the above statement is false.
I agree with you. The only difference from Gillcrist's time is that a CAG
cannot nowadays fly every aircraft on his airwing, but virtually only is own
type. But a CAG does fly!
Regards,
Jose
---
p.s.: check out Gillcrist's books on the F-14 and F-8. Both are gems
Chief
+> >
+> The designation of a CAG aircraft is basically just ceremonial - CAGs
+> don't routinely fly missions while on a cruise. Too much paperwork, I
+> guess. <G>
+>
+> Dave
+Unless this has changed since the early 70's, when Paul Gillcrest (the author
+of "Feet Wet") stopped flying, the above statement is false.
+Familiarity with the capabilities and operations of as many of the wing's aircraft
+as possible would obviously aid the CAG immensely in his job.
Assigning an aircraft to CAG was mostly out of respect. The
squadron's usally assigned the lowest number aircraft to CAG, i.e.
301, 501... CAG did always fiy routine missions on a cruise even
combat missison. A couple that were lost in Viet Nam that I know of
was Cdr. T.E Dunlop, and Captain C. W. Cates.
They didn't fly all of the aircraft aboard because they weren't
qualified. Usually either attack or fighters sometimes a spook.
Paal Naess
>Assigning an aircraft to CAG was mostly out of respect. The
>squadron's usally assigned the lowest number aircraft to CAG, i.e.
>301, 501...
I thought this thread had established that it was the *sqdr CO* that was
assigned x01, CAG being assigned n00, sqdr XO n002?
Paal, the Threadmaker
Chief
+ftho...@atl.mindspring.com (Chief) wrote:
+>Assigning an aircraft to CAG was mostly out of respect. The
+>squadron's usally assigned the lowest number aircraft to CAG, i.e.
+>301, 501...
+
+ I thought this thread had established that it was the *sqdr CO* that was
+assigned x01, CAG being assigned n00, sqdr XO n002?
+
Your absolutely right!
MICOMA
(Chief) writes:
> A couple that were lost in Viet Nam that I know of
>was Cdr. T.E Dunlop, and Captain C. W. Cates.
For those interested:
CDR Thomas E. Dunlop (CAG of CVW-15) was lost over NVN in an A-7E on 6 Apr
1972.
CAPT Charles W. Cates (CAG of CVW-16) was lost in an A-7B accident while
attempting to land at Naha, Okinawa on 18 Aug 1969. It was on the return
back to CONUS.
Other CAGs lost from combat during Vietnam:
CDR Roger M. Netherland (CAG of CVW-5) was lost over NVN in an A-4C on 10
May 1967.
CDR Peter J. Mongilardi, Jr. (CAG of CVW-15) was lost over NVN in an A-4C
on 25 June 1965.
CDR Donald D. Aldern (CAG of CVW-19) was lost over Laos in an A-7A on 29
MICOMA
> The
>squadron's usally assigned the lowest number aircraft to CAG, i.e.
>301, 501...
As we have been discussing, the CAG bird would normally be the x00 series.
The squadron skipper would have his name on the x01 bird.
Mike Weeks MIC...@aol.com
José Herculano
>As we have been discussing, the CAG bird would normally be the x00 series.
> The squadron skipper would have his name on the x01 bird.
By the way, VF-103 has its F-14B in the modex 100? Now that VF-74 is gone,
I am presuming so...
This means that, if the CAG is a Turkey driver, he'll take the 100. Then,
VF-103 being the new Jolly Rogers, plane 101 must be for Ens. Jack Ernie,
right? Then what? 102 for the CO and 103 for the XO?
Can somebody verify my theory vs. the actual deployed squadron?
Regards,
Jose
Robin J. Lee
In article <4l5bsk$l...@vivaldi.telepac.pt>,
José Herculano <herc...@telepac.pt> wrote:
>
>By the way, VF-103 has its F-14B in the modex 100? Now that VF-74 is gone,
>I am presuming so...
VF-103 has continued to operate modex 200 aircraft well after the
disestablishment of VF-74; this has continued into the "Jolly Rogers"
era. Unless an air wing renumbering has taken place very recently, I
believe 103 continues to number its aircraft in the 200s.
I have no idea about the names inscribed on 200, 201, 202, and 203. I
suspect that this would depend on the squadron/air wing leadership.
(He who tries to find hard and fast rules for the way the Navy numbers
things should have large quantities of aspirin on hand.)
--
____________________________________________________________________________
Robin J. Lee amr...@netcom.com
Vulture's Row Worldwide Web Page URL: http://www.webcom.com/amraam/
MICOMA
In article <amraamDq...@netcom.com>, amr...@netcom.com (Robin J. Lee)
writes:
>In article <4l5bsk$l...@vivaldi.telepac.pt>,
>José Herculano <herc...@telepac.pt> wrote:
>>
>>By the way, VF-103 has its F-14B in the modex 100? Now that VF-74 is
gone,
>>I am presuming so...
>
>VF-103 has continued to operate modex 200 aircraft well after the
>disestablishment of VF-74; this has continued into the "Jolly Rogers"
>era. Unless an air wing renumbering has taken place very recently, I
>believe 103 continues to number its aircraft in the 200s.
To continues Robin's post: The Spring issue of The Hook, pg 43 has a
VF-103 "Jolly Rogers AKA Sluggers" F-14B AA201 launching off Big E during
recent workups. So far, it appears that the side number remains as 2xx.
Mike Weeks MIC...@aol.com
mdonalds
In article <amraamDq...@netcom.com>
amr...@netcom.com (Robin J. Lee) writes:
> >By the way, VF-103 has its F-14B in the modex 100? Now that VF-74 is gone,
> >I am presuming so...
>
> VF-103 has continued to operate modex 200 aircraft well after the
> disestablishment of VF-74; this has continued into the "Jolly Rogers"
> era. Unless an air wing renumbering has taken place very recently, I
> believe 103 continues to number its aircraft in the 200s.
I have a recent photo (few months old) of a VF-103 looking good in the
new "colours" testing the LANTIRN pods. It still wears the modex 2xx
and I'm not sure when or if that will change in the future.
> I have no idea about the names inscribed on 200, 201, 202, and 203. I
> suspect that this would depend on the squadron/air wing leadership.
I'm not sure what VF-103 is doing about that. It's one of the questions
I plan to ask when I get better contact with them.
> (He who tries to find hard and fast rules for the way the Navy numbers
> things should have large quantities of aspirin on hand.)
Brother, tell me about it :)
Corsair
__________________________________________________________
Web CAG of The Unofficial "Jolly Rogers" Site
http://www-home.calumet.yorku.ca/mdonalds/www/home.htm
__________________________________________________________
CAG of the "VF-84 Jolly Rogers" Simulation Squadron
__________________________________________________________
99 "Knights of the Air"
in super high-tech jet fighters
- "99 Red Balloons"
__________________________________________________________
José Herculano
> I have a recent photo (few months old) of a VF-103 looking good in the
> new "colours" testing the LANTIRN pods. It still wears the modex 2xx
> and I'm not sure when or if that will change in the future.
Gimme!!!
> I'm not sure what VF-103 is doing about that. It's one of the questions
> I plan to ask when I get better contact with them.
I am also trying hard on that. The one that gets through vouches for the
other?
Jose
Chris Douglas
If you can find one, the last issue of the Japanese aviation magazine "Koku
Fan" to make its way to Austin (I think we usually get them after a
two-to-three month delay) had some good shots of VF-103 with their Jolly
Rogers markings.
Some hobby shops carry Koku Fan.