Nuclear toss bombing
John Coley
simulated toss bombing profiles. (approach at low level/high speed, pull
up into a 3/4 loop, roll out and recover to low level heading back the
way you came). This was presumably pre Blue Steel, and used to avoid
overflying the target.
QUESTION: was such an attack profile ever used by B-52s ?? (or other
big bombers). I can't imagine it, but then I wouldn't have expected the
V bombers to be doing it either.
Any comments gratefully received.
John Coley
ps the footage was from Farnborough air display circa 1958.
Michael J. Edelman
Wasn't a sort of toss-bombing technique used in the first attacks on the Falklands?
I recall that the Vulcasn dropped their loads and were on a heading back to
a refueling point long before the bombs impacted.
The only US bomber I can recall being specifically assigned the toss-bombing
mission- at least for nuclear weapons- was the F-105. A friend designed the
electronics for this mission. It was basically a fancy electromechanical timer
that signaled your release point based on settings. BTW, if anyone knows where
one of the ancient timers is available- if it's been surplused out, that is,
my pal would love to have one for his desk ;-)
--mike
Geoff Miller
mp...@syma.sussex.ac.uk (John Coley) writes:
>I've just seen some interesting video of RAF Victors and Vulcans flying
>simulated toss bombing profiles. (approach at low level/high speed, pull
>up into a 3/4 loop, roll out and recover to low level heading back the
>way you came). This was presumably pre Blue Steel, and used to avoid
>overflying the target.
I've seen references to the Blue Steel in various books, but I've never
found anything of substance about it. Wasn't it an early cruise missile,
comparable to the American Hound Dog? Were the V-bombers the only
aircraft big enough to carry it?
Geoff
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
Geoff Miller + + + + + + + + Sun Microsystems
geo...@purplehaze.Corp.Sun.COM + + + + + + + + Menlo Park, California
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
Lee Hawkins
>>QUESTION: was such an attack profile ever used by B-52s ?? (or other
>>big bombers). I can't imagine it, but then I wouldn't have expected the
>>V bombers to be doing it either.
>>
Then...
In article <1992Nov30.1...@cs.wayne.edu> m...@pookie.pass.wayne.edu writes:
>
>The only US bomber I can recall being specifically assigned the toss-bombing
>mission- at least for nuclear weapons- was the F-105. A friend designed the
>electronics for this mission. It was basically a fancy electromechanical timer
>that signaled your release point based on settings. BTW, if anyone knows where
>one of the ancient timers is available- if it's been surplused out, that is,
>my pal would love to have one for his desk ;-)
> --mike
Others that I know about were:
A3D Skywarrior (aka Whale)
B-58 Hustler
Interesting stories:
B-58 pilot: "I got out of the Air Force because I didn't
particularly enjoy toss bombing practice in the B-58."
A3D aviator: "The plan was that we would drop our bombs on our
targets in the Soviet Union. The problem was we didn't have enoungh
fuel to make it back to the carrier. Therefore, the plan was to punch
out over a sparsely inhabited forest [in the USSR] and try to make our way
back on our own. For a while (before it got to be an administration nightmare)
our survival kits had gold in them to use as currency."
--Perhaps this story explains the origin for the "unofficial"
nickname for the A3D (All 3 Dead).
Cheers,
--Lee
________________________________________________________________________________
R. Lee Hawkins lhaw...@annie.wellesley.edu
Department of Astronomy lhaw...@lucy.wellesley.edu
Whitin Observatory
Wellesley College Ph. 617-283-2708
Wellesley, MA 02181 FAX 617-283-3642
________________________________________________________________________________
Carl A Slenk
transfer 2 A-10's to the Forest Service for use as fire-bombers with an
extrernal tank. (what did they do with the gun?)
Anyone have any additional info?
--
Carl A. Slenk | "A computer lets you make more mistakes faster
sl...@hal.emba.uvm.ed | then any other invention with the possible
University of Vermont | exceptions of handguns and Tequilla" -
My opinions;get your own | Mitch Ratcliffe
Stefano Pagiola
> I've just seen some interesting video of RAF Victors and
> Vulcans flying simulated toss bombing profiles. (approach at
> low level/high speed, pull up into a 3/4 loop, roll out and
> recover to low level heading back the way you came). This was
> presumably pre Blue Steel, and used to avoid overflying the target.
>
> QUESTION: was such an attack profile ever used by B-52s ??
> (or other big bombers). I can't imagine it, but then I
> wouldn't have expected the V bombers to be doing it either.
>
>
one doing it in the Wings/Airpower article on the B-47, oh, it must
have been about 15 years ago.
--
-
Stefano Pagiola
Food Research Institute, Stanford University
spag...@frinext.stanford.edu (NeXTMail encouraged)
spag...@FRI-nxt-Pagiola.stanford.edu (NeXTMail encouraged)
Scott McCoy
--
Scott McCoy Harris ISD Opinions expressed are my own.
Staff Eng - SW Internet: smc...@dw3g.ess.harris.com
Toby . Hughes
>mission- at least for nuclear weapons- was the F-105. A friend designed the
>electronics for this mission. It was basically a fancy electromechanical timer
>that signaled your release point based on settings. BTW, if anyone knows where
>one of the ancient timers is available- if it's been surplused out, that is,
>my pal would love to have one for his desk ;-)
> --mike
>
F-4 Combat Crew training in the mid and late sixties included toss-bombing.
TH
John Mosbarger
: Last year Av Leak carried a short bit on how the air force was going to
There was a short article in the Salem, OR, paper (probably the same
press release) indicating that the cost of modifying the 2 A-10's would be
around $200K, and if the mods worked OK, then 20 more would be converted.
I believe the conversions were to be done in Medford, OR. I would guess
that the gun would be the first item to be removed (the term "ground attack"
would undoubtedly mean something different to the Forest Service :-)).
John
--
*****************************************************************************
| John Mosbarger | You know why many people commit suicide |
| | during the holidays? It's because they're |
| HP McMinnville, OR | forced to spend time with their relatives. |
| | --John Belushi |
| jo...@hpmcaa.mcm.hp.com | |
|***************************************************************************|
| Opinions are mine and mine alone. |
*****************************************************************************
Doug Faunt N6TQS 510-655-8604
doug, ex-ATN2, in VA125 in 1967-9
Chris Schuermann
> I've just seen some interesting video of RAF Victors and Vulcans flying
> simulated toss bombing profiles. (approach at low level/high speed, pull
> up into a 3/4 loop, roll out and recover to low level heading back the
> way you came). This was presumably pre Blue Steel, and used to avoid
> overflying the target.
>
> QUESTION: was such an attack profile ever used by B-52s ?? (or other
> big bombers). I can't imagine it, but then I wouldn't have expected the
> V bombers to be doing it either.
>
I believe that this move was (is) called the Ladds manuvre (sp?)
The idea is to launch a nuke which has a parachute which deploys as apogee
(the top of the arc). I know that the F-111s use this method...
Don't know about B52s tho????
e.l.watkins
The B-47 was to be used as a toss bomber also.
-earl
Michael Corvin
toss bombing among the possible delivery profiles. This includes the F-104G (flown
by W.Germany, Canada and others), the F-105, the A-4 and others. For some,
such as the F104G, it was the primary delivery technique. It was the only way
to put the bomb on target with reasonable accuracy and give the plane a chance
to get out of the area before it went boom (unless a gound burst with a delayed
fuse was used). I don't imagine that it was a technique used in the B-52 since
executing the half-loop and roll in that beast would be a tricky affair (but
given all the amazing things the BUFF has accomplished who knows..?)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Corvin PP-ASEL, PP-G zw...@starfighter.den.mmc.com
just another spaced rocket scientist at Martin Marietta Astronautics Group
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
=============== My views, not Martin Marietta's ========================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl Pettypiece
>I recall that the Vulcasn dropped their loads and were on a heading back to
>a refueling point long before the bombs impacted.
>
bombs impacted, but that's because they released them at a very
high altitude (well, high compared to modern techniques, anyway).
They had lots of time to turn around. I think the reasons were
that it was too vulnerable (being big and relatively slow) and
they didn't have a lot of fuel to spare, and it's more economical
up there. Their accuracy from that altitude was far from
exemplary, however.
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl Pettypiece (pet...@gaul.csd.uwo.ca) Disclaimer: Hell, I don't
Department of Computer Science even know if these are MY
University of Western Ontario opinions!
Dan Sorenson
>I don't imagine that it was a technique used in the B-52 since
>executing the half-loop and roll in that beast would be a tricky affair (but
>given all the amazing things the BUFF has accomplished who knows..?)
This got me to thinking, which is a hazardous thing. I've heard
folklore (but *published* folklore) saying that a B-52 once did a split-S
over Vietnam to evade a SAM. I've also heard a B-17 once did a standard
loop-the-loop (has that a specific name?) in order to get some stuck
landing gear down during World War II. What is the strangest bit of
acrobatics you've heard of from a plane larger than a fighter? I'm not
after documented acts, but more on the lines of "air stories" that are
at least remotely plausible.
I like to think the designers cringe when they hear of these.
< Dan Sorenson, DoD #1066 z1...@exnet.iastate.edu vik...@iastate.edu >
< ISU only censors what I read, not what I say. Don't blame them. >
< "This isn't an answer, it's a pagan dance around a midnight fire >
< written in intellectual runes." -- Rich Young >
Focused on Infinity
In article <viking.7...@vincent1.iastate.edu> vik...@iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson) writes:
>What is the strangest bit of
>acrobatics you've heard of from a plane larger than a fighter? I'm not
>after documented acts, but more on the lines of "air stories" that are
>at least remotely plausible.
allegedly in Seattle when it happened, that when the 707 prototype was
being demoed to the Boeing brass, the test pilot looped it.
but that's not exactly military, is it?
--
..___... ...___... ...___... ...___... ...___... ...___... ...___... ...___...
Marc Reeve
cmr...@ucscb.ucsc.edu cmr...@deeptht.santa-cruz.ca.us
"Dragon with matches loose on the town
Takes a whole pail of water just to cool him down."
Naturally my opinions are unheard by UCSC, as it is a bureaucratic monolith.
Stefano Pagiola
> Well, I heard from one of my uncles, who heard from a FOAF who was
> allegedly in Seattle when it happened, that when the 707 prototype
> was being demoed to the Boeing brass, the test pilot looped it.
> but that's not exactly military, is it?
The 707 prototype was rolled, not looped.
John Coley
was specifically optimised for nuclear toss against naval targets.
However, my origional question was about BIG bombers doing this not the
little bitty types (even an F111s little next to a Vulcan). Seems like
the B47 & B58 are only contenders (must be pretty impressive in a '47).
John Coley
John Coley
:
: I've seen references to the Blue Steel in various books, but I've never
: found anything of substance about it. Wasn't it an early cruise missile,
: comparable to the American Hound Dog? Were the V-bombers the only
: aircraft big enough to carry it?
Blue Steel was a standoff missile for the V force, high
altitude launch, range about 100 miles, speed about M2 (I think),
warhead was in the megaton range. The idea was to allow the bomber to
release outside the targets defensive envelope and (hopefully) escape.
There was a proposal for a Mk2 Blue Steel which would have had much
longer range, low altitude flight, better accuracy..etc etc. This was
scrapped in favor of arming the V force with Skybolt air launched
ballistic missile. Many designs for Skybolt carriers were proposed
(ranging from the stage 6 Vulcan with up to 6 skybolt to modified
Tridents carrying 2) but the whole lot got torn up when skybolt was
killed in the US. Shame really as all that lovely funding got
transferred from building beautiful aeroplanes into making ships that
sink (polaris subs) :-) :-)
John Coley
Charles K. Scott
>
> >I've just seen some interesting video of RAF Victors and Vulcans flying
> >simulated toss bombing profiles. (approach at low level/high speed, pull
> >up into a 3/4 loop, roll out and recover to low level heading back the
> >way you came). This was presumably pre Blue Steel, and used to avoid
> >overflying the target.
I've met and talked with an ex Air Force pilot who actually trained
using this technique. However my impression of the maneuver is
slightly different. I thought the pilot flew towards the target then
went into a zoom climb but still heading towards the target, climbing
at around 45 to 50 degrees, the bomb is released and the pilot
immediately pulls back on the stick and executes an Immelman. The bomb
continues on a parabolic arc towards the target, exploding somewhere
near it. This allows the pilot to forego overflying the target. Maybe
I'm missunderstanding what is meant by "3/4" of a loop. To me, if
you've gone 3/4's of the way around in a loop, you aren't heading
forward anymore, you're going back the way you came. Completing the
loop at this point continues your track over the target and the bomb is
heading back away from it. Am I not understanding something here?
Corky Scott
Eugene F. Styer
>acrobatics you've heard of from a plane larger than a fighter? I'm not
>after documented acts, but more on the lines of "air stories" that are
>at least remotely plausible.
>
> I like to think the designers cringe when they hear of these.
In the book "Superfortress" (which is at home) a story is mentioned where it
was (accidentally) found that a stripped B-29 could turn with a P-47. I imagine
the low-level tactics with B-52's C-130's, etc. would make interesting stories.
--
Eugene Styer - 402 Wallace, EKU, Richmond, KY 40475 mats...@eku.bitnet
"And to think I had a nice, safe career going for me putting mafiosi in jail"
Steve Creps
> Vulcans flying simulated toss bombing profiles. (approach at
> low level/high speed, pull up into a 3/4 loop, roll out and
> recover to low level heading back the way you came). This was
> presumably pre Blue Steel, and used to avoid overflying the target.
Yes, I believe the idea of toss bombing is to release the bomb
while on an upward flight path, so that the bomb actually starts out
on an upward trajectory. This has the effect of increasing the time
the bomb is in the air, giving the bomber that much more time to clear
out.
If a laser-guided weapon is being used, then the plane must keep
its target illuminator, usually underneath the plane, pointed at the
target. This can still be done during the climb (during which I
believe lock-on occurs) and the rollout, and probably the descent
after turning away from the target.
- - - - - - - - - -
Steve Creps, Indiana University
cr...@silver.ucs.indiana.edu
Geoff Miller
sl...@hal.emba.uvm.edu (Carl A Slenk) writes:
>Last year Av Leak carried a short bit on how the air force was going to
>transfer 2 A-10's to the Forest Service for use as fire-bombers with an
>extrernal tank. (what did they do with the gun?)
The gun will be retained for use against environmentalist-wacko
tree spikers.
dsn...@falcon.aamrl.wpafb.af.mil
> QUESTION: was such an attack profile ever used by B-52s ?? (or other
> big bombers). I can't imagine it, but then I wouldn't have expected the
> V bombers to be doing it either.
>
obtained in the toss does nothing for the nuclear scenario. You want to
be away from that sucker when it goes off. In the event that you don't want
to fly near the target the bombers use a SRAM (Short Range Attack Missile).
One saying from bomber pilots with regard to the SRAM is "30 minute delivery
or the next one is free" :) David--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
David B. Snyder Logicon Technical Services Inc.
dsn...@falcon.aamrl.wpafb.af.mil Wright-Patterson Air Force Base
513-255-7557 Dayton, Ohio USA
---------------------------------------------------------------------
It is said that GOD doesn't subtract from ones' time on earth, those
hours spent flying.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
1946 Cessna 140 N76234 "The lady in waiting" Owner/Operator
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Opinions expressed are my own and not those of Logicon or the USAF.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
MegaZone23
>Well, I heard from one of my uncles, who heard from a FOAF who was
>allegedly in Seattle when it happened, that when the 707 prototype was
>being demoed to the Boeing brass, the test pilot looped it.
>but that's not exactly military, is it?
Not quite... When being demo'd the 367-80, or just Dash 80, which served as
the prototype for the 707/C-135 series, the pilot barrel rolled the aricraft.
Which is no big deal, if done correctly it is a 1g move so the airframe doesn't
notice it.
I've seen a film of someone barrel rolling a Sea Stallion. (Yes, a CH-53...
it wasn't a Super Stallion though...)
There is a German pilot who flies a full acrobatics routine in a Bo-105
helicopter...
But looping a B-17 probably isn't that hard, it is a fairly strong plane to
take the jolt of the sudden decrease in weight as the bombs are dropped and
to withstand battle damage.
Now, looping a C-5, or AN-225 would be a sight to see... :-)
###############################################################################
# I have one prejudice, and that is against stupidity. Use your mind, think! #
#Email mega...@wpi.wpi.edu Moderator, WPI anime FTP site 130.215.24.1 /anime#
###############################################################################
claff...@ccsub.ctstateu.edu
> Focused on Infinity writes
>> Well, I heard from one of my uncles, who heard from a FOAF who was
>> allegedly in Seattle when it happened, that when the 707 prototype
>> was being demoed to the Boeing brass, the test pilot looped it.
>> but that's not exactly military, is it?
>
> The 707 prototype was rolled, not looped.
For some reason, I remember the 747 being rolled, not the 707. And it was done
to impress airline executives, not military brass. (I believe this is taken
from the _Wings_ show on the 747.)
================================================================================
"Indiana" Joe Claffey = Disclaimer: All non-quoted opinions
CLAFF...@CCSU.CTSTATEU.EDU = expressed are my own, and anyone else
Quote: "Make no small plans." = trying to take credit for them is in
- Daniel Burnham = big trouble!
================================================================================
Peter Schaefer
In article <viking.7...@vincent1.iastate.edu>, vik...@iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson) writes:
|> This got me to thinking, which is a hazardous thing. I've heard
|> folklore (but *published* folklore) saying that a B-52 once did a split-S
|> over Vietnam to evade a SAM. I've also heard a B-17 once did a standard
|> loop-the-loop (has that a specific name?) in order to get some stuck
|> landing gear down during World War II. What is the strangest bit of
|> acrobatics you've heard of from a plane larger than a fighter? I'm not
|> after documented acts, but more on the lines of "air stories" that are
|> at least remotely plausible.
|>
|> I like to think the designers cringe when they hear of these.
|>
|> < Dan Sorenson, DoD #1066 z1...@exnet.iastate.edu vik...@iastate.edu >
|> < ISU only censors what I read, not what I say. Don't blame them. >
|> < "This isn't an answer, it's a pagan dance around a midnight fire >
|> < written in intellectual runes." -- Rich Young >
I spoke with a guy from Northrop who says that it has been worked out
on the simulator that the B-2 is capable (after removing the FBW limit of 60deg
on the roll angle) of performing a barrel-roll. The maneuver was demonstrated
on the Northrop simlulator by a test-pilot. Some people are itching for a
chance to try it for real. That would be a sight to see.
Peter Schaefer
scha...@scf.usc.edu
Nathan F. Janette
>
>
> sl...@hal.emba.uvm.edu (Carl A Slenk) writes:
>
> >Last year Av Leak carried a short bit on how the air force was going to
> >transfer 2 A-10's to the Forest Service for use as fire-bombers with an
> >extrernal tank. (what did they do with the gun?)
>
> The gun will be retained for use against environmentalist-wacko
> tree spikers.
Why not just defoliate the forest so they'll have nothing
to spike?
Oh yeah, this is rec.aviation.military....um, what I
meant to say was:
Why not just have C-130s perform low-level tactical missions
discharging Agent Orange over the forest so those
commies will have nothing to spike?
Wait - I've got it - C-130s doing toss bombing of Agent Orange!
--
Nathan Janette
PPP link from hilbert.csb.yale.edu
Please reply to: nat...@laplace.csb.yale.edu (NeXT)
MegaZone23
>Why not just have C-130s perform low-level tactical missions
>discharging Agent Orange over the forest so those
>commies will have nothing to spike?
>Wait - I've got it - C-130s doing toss bombing of Agent Orange!
ok, I know that was sarcasm (I HOPE it was anyway...) but it got me thinking...
I know about the use of explosives to 'blow' out fires, what would the use of
FAEs on a fire be? ie a MC-130H drops a Big Blue on it...
Gavin Dodds
In article <1fhcms...@sal-sun64.usc.edu>, scha...@sal-sun64.usc.edu (Peter Schaefer) writes:
>
>
>Not exactly what you asked for, but here goes.
> I spoke with a guy from Northrop who says that it has been worked out
>on the simulator that the B-2 is capable (after removing the FBW limit of 60deg
>on the roll angle) of performing a barrel-roll. The maneuver was demonstrated
>on the Northrop simlulator by a test-pilot. Some people are itching for a
>chance to try it for real. That would be a sight to see.
> Peter Schaefer
> scha...@scf.usc.edu
On the subject of simulators.
Being in th Air Training Corps in Britain I have been on many RAF bases, including RAF Boulmer where apart from radar they have B flight of 202 sqn which is the RAF's SAR (Search and Rescue) outfit. When I visited the squadron on the base we were shown round the Aircraft (Sea King SAR3s) and the pilot who showed us round told us a story.
Apparently on the Sea King simulator it is possible to go up to a cirtain height, switch off the engines, fold the rotors, unfold them, start up the engines again and pull out before hitting the ground! The pilot added that nobody had tried it with the real thing.
[] [] [] [] [] []
[] [] [] [] [] []
[] [] [] GAVIN (Gavin...@newcastle.ac.uk) [] [] []
[][][][][] [][][][][]
[] Black Devils []
[] []
[] Fortune favours the reckless! []
[] []
Focused on Infinity
In article <1fi6jk...@bigboote.WPI.EDU> mega...@obsidian.WPI.EDU (MegaZone23) writes:
>I know about the use of explosives to 'blow' out fires, what would the use of
>FAEs on a fire be? ie a MC-130H drops a Big Blue on it...
Considering the published effects of Big Blue (that's BLU-26 right?) i'd
call this a *very* bad idea. Firstly, because it knocks down the forest
that you're purportedly trying to save. Secondly, because it sets the whole
area ablaze rather than just the locality you're bombing.
--
..___... ...___... ...___... ...___... ...___... ...___... ...___... ...___...
Marc Reeve
cmr...@ucscb.ucsc.edu cmr...@deeptht.armory.com
I want a MAC!
Michael J. Edelman
>
>In article <1fi6jk...@bigboote.WPI.EDU> mega...@obsidian.WPI.EDU (MegaZone23) writes:
>>I know about the use of explosives to 'blow' out fires, what would the use of
>>FAEs on a fire be? ie a MC-130H drops a Big Blue on it...
>
>Considering the published effects of Big Blue (that's BLU-26 right?) i'd
>call this a *very* bad idea. Firstly, because it knocks down the forest
>that you're purportedly trying to save. Secondly, because it sets the whole
>area ablaze rather than just the locality you're bombing.
>
a firebreak to prevent the spread. Also, a fuel-air device should actually
remove the oxygen from a local area, which will help extinguish the fire.
Firefighting consists of three main task: Remove the conbustable material, cool
it, and deny it oxygen. The FAE does two of these rather well.
I vote we get together and try an experiment.
--mike
Nolan Hinshaw
At the '92 Moffett Air Show I saw a beautifully restored C45 do some 85+
degree banked climbing turns, and in previous shows I observed P3s and C130s
doing what appeared to be knife edges over the runway. Do dis count?
--
Nolan "Wanna see a Concorde do a barrel roll" Hinshaw
Internet: no...@twg.com Dingalingnet: (415)962-7197
T.M.Haddock
Okay, let's all meet at Mike's house. We'll start a fire in
his backyard BBQ grill and then drop a FAE on it! I'll bring
the hotdogs! :)
TRAVIS
Gunter Ahrendt
>In article <viking.7...@vincent1.iastate.edu> vik...@iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson) writes:
>Well, I heard from one of my uncles, who heard from a FOAF who was
>allegedly in Seattle when it happened, that when the 707 prototype was
>being demoed to the Boeing brass, the test pilot looped it.
>but that's not exactly military, is it?
I have footage of this, it is not a loop, but a roll.
Derek H Cedillo
Hi,
I was wondering if there was any diplomatic Doctrine
of any kind (espianage (sp?), Prisoner Treatment, CIA policies, etc.)
that were published in regards to the U2 incident.
Yes, I know gary even wrote his own book and all,
but I am interested in official govt Documents on the subject.
Basically, I am looking for Cold War related stuff, but that
pertains particularly to the U2.
Thanks for any info.
Derek
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"There Are Two Great Tragedies In Life,
One Is Not To Get Your Heart's Desire.
The Other Is To Get It.
-Bernard Shaw
Death to all fanatics!
:
:But looping a B-17 probably isn't that hard, it is a fairly strong plane to
:take the jolt of the sudden decrease in weight as the bombs are dropped and
:to withstand battle damage.
The Lancaster bomber was reportedly loopable. My father heard a story during
the war of one on a bombing mission which got caught in a nose-high attitude
due to some flack. The pilot is reported to have added power and finished
the loop, much to the consternation of the crew and the confusion of the
other bombers in his flight. I've never been sure I believe that particular
story, but my understanding is that loops in general aren't too demanding
of an airplane, if properly flown.
--Craig
--
go...@pixar.com
Make Welfare as hard to get as Bulding Permits
Roger Ritter
>At the '92 Moffett Air Show I saw a beautifully restored C45 do some 85+
>degree banked climbing turns, and in previous shows I observed P3s and C130s
>doing what appeared to be knife edges over the runway. Do dis count?
Well, at the Hanscom airshow this year, I saw a C-45 (Beech 18) (maybe
the same one?) do a full "warbird aerobatics" airshow act. Loops and
rolls, mainly.
--
Roger Ritter N1FZZ (R.Ri...@ma30.bull.com) PP-ASEL, AGI
1946 Luscombe 8A N71983 "Rocky"
Sheep do not so much fly as plummet! NH CAP: Profile 49
Toby . Hughes
>no...@twg.com (Nolan Hinshaw) writes:
>
>
>>At the '92 Moffett Air Show I saw a beautifully restored C45 do some 85+
>>degree banked climbing turns, and in previous shows I observed P3s and C130s
>>doing what appeared to be knife edges over the runway. Do dis count?
At Transpo '72, Dulles Airport, the legendary Frank Tallman performed a full
acro airshow in a Grumman "Duck" floatplane. Scary!
TH
Steve Bridges
>In article <viking.7...@vincent1.iastate.edu> vik...@iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson) writes:
>>landing gear down during World War II. What is the strangest bit of
>>acrobatics you've heard of from a plane larger than a fighter? I'm not
>>after documented acts, but more on the lines of "air stories" that are
>>at least remotely plausible.
>>
>> I like to think the designers cringe when they hear of these.
>In the book "Superfortress" (which is at home) a story is mentioned where it
>was (accidentally) found that a stripped B-29 could turn with a P-47. I imagine
>the low-level tactics with B-52's C-130's, etc. would make interesting stories.
Yeah, I've read that also. But being able to turn with a P-47 was AT
ALTITUDE, not at low levels (by at altitude, I mean above 30,000 feet).
Steve
--
Steve Bridges, Programmer/Analyst| NCR - Law Department, WHQ-5
st...@law7.DaytonOH.NCR.COM ___| Phone:(513)-445-4486 622-4486 (VOICEplus)
Sci.military moderator | "The airplane does not recognize attitude,
providing a maneuver is conducted at one G" -- A.M. "Tex" Johnston
Chad Barret Wemyss
I believe that the B-47 was not only loopable, but could do aileron rolls. It
was aerodynamically a very clean aircraft, and it was also pretty strong, with
a good T-W ratio, for a bomber. Many pilots were surprised by it's incredible
glide abilities, and had a hard time getting used to landing the plane
Chad Wemyss
Ron Wanttaja
>acrobatics you've heard of from a plane larger than a fighter? I'm not
>after documented acts, but more on the lines of "air stories" that are
>at least remotely plausible.
Martin Caiden, in _Iron Annie_ describes a case at the end of WWII where a
batch of German fighter pilots took a Ju-52 and headed west to surrender to
Americans (rather than the Russians). They all had parachutes, and decided
to try to pull the wings off Tante Ju. They looped several times (and
possibly other maneuvers) and couldn't do it. After the third loop or so,
one of the guys noticed a flight of Mustangs off to the side, watching the
show....
Ron Wanttaja
pr...@plato.ds.boeing.com
Scott McCoy
a barrel-roll was possible in the B-52. He said that it
was only a 2G maneuver (although my memory fails me here -- he
may have said it was 'less than a 2G' maneuver). He also said
he tried several times to convince his crew in 'Nam to let him
attempt the roll, but he just couldn't swing it.
Guess we'll never know. :-)
--
Scott McCoy Harris ISD Opinions expressed are my own.
Staff Eng - SW Internet: smc...@dw3g.ess.harris.com
Scott Silvey
% A3D aviator: "The plan was that we would drop our bombs on our
% targets in the Soviet Union. The problem was we didn't have enoungh
% fuel to make it back to the carrier. Therefore, the plan was to punch
% out over a sparsely inhabited forest [in the USSR] and try to make our way
% back on our own. For a while (before it got to be an administration nightmare)
% our survival kits had gold in them to use as currency."
% --Perhaps this story explains the origin for the "unofficial"
% nickname for the A3D (All 3 Dead).
Actually, as I understand it, the nickname "All 3 Dead" came from the A3's
unusually high accident ratio. Wasn't it the largest plane to operate
from carriers?
Scott
Charles K. Scott
pr...@plato.ds.boeing.com (Ron Wanttaja) writes:
> They all had parachutes, and decided
> to try to pull the wings off Tante Ju. They looped several times (and
> possibly other maneuvers) and couldn't do it.
One wonders how they would have exited the aircraft once the wings
pulled off. I mean how did they know both would come off? What if
just one popped free? Also, you said the story claimed a "batch" of
pilots. With both wings missing and the aircraft heading earthward
like a bomb, would they line up at the exit and play "after you
Alphonse", "no no you first Gastone"? :-)
Corky Scott
Nolan Hinshaw
In article <SCOTT.92D...@sting.Berkeley.EDU>, sc...@sting.Berkeley.EDU (Scott Silvey) writes:
[stuff about the A3D deleted]
|>unusually high accident ratio. Wasn't it the largest plane to operate
C130, during carrier quals. According to various sci.military folks it took
off without benifit of a cat and landed w.o.b. of arresting gear. It's a great
short field plane. It'd make a nifty mobile home if it didn't chew fuel so
gustily.
T.M.Haddock
Didn't the pilot also get a medal for it - Navy Cross, Silver Star, or ?
Scott McCoy
There was a 'Wings' episode which dealt with the Hercules and
showed a short (approx 10 sec) film clip of an actual carrier
landing by a C-130. Can't remember at the moment if it showed
the take-off, though. The name of the plane was something like
'Look Ma, No Hook'.
Ron Wanttaja
>In article <Byrwp...@plato.ds.boeing.com> pr...@plato.ds.boeing.com (Me!) writes:
>
>> They all had parachutes, and decided
>> to try to pull the wings off Tante Ju. They looped several times (and
>> possibly other maneuvers) and couldn't do it.
>
>One wonders how they would have exited the aircraft once the wings
>pulled off. I mean how did they know both would come off? What if
>just one popped free? Also, you said the story claimed a "batch" of
>pilots. With both wings missing and the aircraft heading earthward
>like a bomb, would they line up at the exit and play "after you
>Alphonse", "no no you first Gastone"? :-)
Aw, heck, Corky, you're making me violate Usenet rule #1: Looking it
up. :-)
One sometimes has to take Caiden's nonfiction with a teensy grain of
salt... I don't think he made this one up; he just didn't look too closely
at what would make a good story.
Anyway, details are found on Page 103-104 of his _The Saga of Iron Annie_.
Here are the salient points:
1. The occupants were four Luftwaffe fighter pilots; the event happened on
the very last day of the war. The implication, of course, is that the
occupants of the Ju-52 just didn't give a sh*t.
2. Prior to performing the first loop, they jettisoned every door and
emergency hatch. Yes, I know, it wouldn't necessarily help if only one
wing failed....
3. Their first maneuver was an ordinary loop. The second... supposedly...
was an OUTSIDE loop.
4. They landed normally at the USAAF base they'd been stunting over.
Hey, *I* wasn't there. I'm just quoting :-).
Ron Wanttaja
pr...@plato.ds.boeing.com
Dave Pierson
>In article <SCOTT.92D...@sting.Berkeley.EDU>, sc...@sting.Berkeley.EDU
>(Scott Silvey) writes:
>[stuff about the A3D deleted]
>|>unusually high accident ratio. Wasn't it the largest plane to operate
[from a carrier...]
>C130, during carrier quals. According to various sci.military folks it took
>off without benifit of a cat and landed w.o.b. of arresting gear. It's a great
>short field plane. It'd make a nifty mobile home if it didn't chew fuel so
>gustily.
Trivia point: Navy "landed" one of the big rigids (Shenandoah?) on the
Saratoga, during the thirties. Slightly larger than a C130. 8)>>
Tho not a "plane". Better known is the use of the USS Patoka, an
"oiler" as a mooring ship...
thanks
dave pierson |the facts, as accurately as i can manage,
Digital Equipment Corporation |the opinions, my own.
40 Old Bolton Rd |I am the NRA.
Stow, Mass 01775 USA pie...@msd26.enet.dec.com
"He has read everything, and, to his credit, written nothing." A J Raffles
Mary Shafer
carrier qualification.
Depending on how you define "large" the U-2 may be the largest
carrier-qualified airplane. (That's if you use wingspan as
your measure, rather than weight.) When Ben Rich gave a talk
here a few years ago he discussed this. It just fit.
--
Mary Shafer DoD #0362 KotFR NASA Dryden Flight Research Facility, Edwards, CA
sha...@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov Of course I don't speak for NASA
"A MiG at your six is better than no MiG at all." Unknown US fighter pilot
Tim Gillum
>I've got a video tape, currently loaned out, that shows the C-130
>carrier qualification.
deck long enough? I've always wondered.
-Tim
--
____ Tim Gillum (gil...@en.ecn.purdue.edu) ____
/___ /|======================================================|\ ___\
| | | the poet's pen...gives to airy nothing | | |
|____|/===== a local habitation and a name. - Shakespeare =====\|____|
Geoff Miller
>pie...@cimcad.enet.dec.com (Dave Pierson)
>Trivia point: Navy "landed" one of the big rigids (Shenandoah?) on the
>Saratoga, during the thirties. Slightly larger than a C130. 8)>>
>Tho not a "plane". Better known is the use of the USS Patoka, an
>"oiler" as a mooring ship...
The airship in question was USS Los Angeles.
Geoff
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
Geoff Miller + + + + + + + + Sun Microsystems
geo...@purplehaze.Corp.Sun.COM + + + + + + + + Menlo Park, California
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
Mary Shafer
T> In article <SHAFER.92D...@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov> sha...@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov (Mary Shafer) writes:
>I've got a video tape, currently loaned out, that shows the C-130
>carrier qualification.
T> I saw in an earlier post that no catapult was used. Was JATO used or is the
T> deck long enough? I've always wondered.
No JATO (which is actually RATO, but that doesn't much matter) at all.
Since the C-130 is designed to carry quite a heavy load, it's got a
pretty good climb rate when it's empty. It can really leap off the
ground. And, of course, it was at sea level.
Michael Stalnaker
C-130 with *no* arresting gear, and *no* JATO bottles. The carrier
used was the USS America (I was aboard her for a while, and there's
pictures of it in the wardroom). I don't remember the exact dates,
but late 1960's comes to mind. With respect to a C-130 using Jato, I've
seen the Blue Angels C-130, Fat Albert, take off on JATO, and it looks like
about a 2 to 400 foot run, followed by a climb-out to 500ft at a 45-50% angle
of climb.
--Mike Stalnaker
Michael Corvin
C-130 doing a RATO take off. The deck angle is truly impressive! The
air is also humid enough to show condensation in the prop tip vortices.
I saw a Canadian Armed Forces C-130 do such a take off at CFB Shearwater
many years ago and it was very dramatic. The RATO packs sure make a
racket. Can anyone tell us what the thrust levels are for those things
(either pack total or per RATO engine)?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Corvin PP-ASEL, PP-G zw...@starfighter.den.mmc.com
just another spaced rocket scientist at Martin Marietta Astronautics Group
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
=============== My views, not Martin Marietta's ========================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thomas Cohen
>I've got a video tape, currently loaned out, that shows the C-130
>carrier qualification.
Speaking of landing C130s in short spaces (which we weren't really),
the above reminded me of a story I heard once about an airshow down
in Melbourne. It seems (so the story goes) that a Caribou and a Herc
were having a short landing contest (I don't know how realistic this
is, so don't blame me) and the Caribou guy went first, touched down
and stopped as soon as he could. Fine. Then the C130's turn. Coming
in at a few feet altitude he shoved it into reverse thrust whilst
airborne, and from position of first contact to stop was some incredibly
short distance which beat the Caribou handily.
A question I have is (well a couple really) how likely is this (ie. are
the Caribou and C130 remotely equal on landing rolls; and what sort of
damage would this do to the Herc. I've seen their landing gear and it
is strong, but is it that strong?
regards,
--
thos cohen |Softway Pty Ltd
|ACSnet: th...@softway.oz
"Lex is a flaky implementation of a bad idea" |UUCP: ...!uunet!softway.oz!thos
- Ken Thompson, 1988 |Internet: th...@softway.oz.au
The Great and Mighty Confused
plane landed kind of hard...my guess is that either the gear gave way or the
shock of impact took care of them. So I guess the gear is sufficient to
support a moderately rough touch-down, but nothing too rugged.
Andy Entrekin
GTRI-CC/AERO
(next door to Lockheed's C-130 "corral")
Urban F
where it is claimed the USA showed some slight interest in it, to
be used on carriers. Nothing came of that, but Curtis LeMay was
influenced by it enough to recommend side-by-side seating for the
B-52, as opposed to tandem, which it probably would have had otherwise.
--
Urban Fredriksson u...@icl.se
A weapon is a device for making your enemy change his mind.
Dave Hagood
|> I'm reading an article on the Vickers Valiant in Air International,
|> where it is claimed the USA showed some slight interest in it, to
|> be used on carriers. Nothing came of that, but Curtis LeMay was
|> influenced by it enough to recommend side-by-side seating for the
|> B-52, as opposed to tandem, which it probably would have had otherwise.
|> --
Interesting. The XB-52 had tandem seating, a la B-47, but I had never
heard any reason for the change.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
David M. Hagood Martin Marietta Astronautics Group |
|
Voice: (303) 977-9657 When in danger, or in doubt, |
E-mail: hag...@den.mmc.com Run in circles, scream and shout. |
Fax: (303) 977-1530 |
|
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
static char *disclaimer = "My opinions, not Martin Marietta's." |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Craig Dowell
>Speaking of landing C130s in short spaces (which we weren't really),
>the above reminded me of a story I heard once about an airshow down
>in Melbourne. It seems (so the story goes) that a Caribou and a Herc
>were having a short landing contest (I don't know how realistic this
>is, so don't blame me) and the Caribou guy went first, touched down
>and stopped as soon as he could. Fine. Then the C130's turn. Coming
>in at a few feet altitude he shoved it into reverse thrust whilst
>airborne, and from position of first contact to stop was some incredibly
>short distance which beat the Caribou handily.
Sounds like an assault landing. You don't see many of these as you get
to rebuild the engines after you're done.
-- Craig
Tim Gillum
Huh? From what I understood, it was a fairly common procedure with our
unit. And I know that the jets guys and crewchiefs weren't changing engines
_that_ often. In fact that's one of the things that gives 130s such a
short landing, the ability to reverse thrust so easily by pitching the blades
back. As long as the engines aren't over-torqued, then the only problem is
how hard you hit the ground. No, assult landings, per se, are done a lot,
just not hard enough to do damage.
Stephen Eldredge
>Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
>Path: news.byu.edu!gatech!europa.asd.contel.com!darwin.sura.net!wupost!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!saimiri.primate.wisc.edu!ames!news.dfrf.nasa.gov!shafer
>From: sha...@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov (Mary Shafer)
>Subject: Re: big a/c on carriers (was Re: Nuclear toss bombing)
>In-Reply-To: gil...@en.ecn.purdue.edu's message of Thu, 10 Dec 92 22:37:48 GMT
>Message-ID: <SHAFER.92D...@ra.dfrf.nasa.gov>
>Sender: ne...@news.dfrf.nasa.gov (Usenet news)
>Organization: NASA Dryden, Edwards, Cal.
>References: <1992Dec7.1...@twg.com> <1992Dec10.1...@ryn.mro4.dec.com>
> <SHAFER.92D...@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov>
> <1992Dec10....@en.ecn.purdue.edu>
>Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 02:21:49 GMT
>Lines: 18
>On Thu, 10 Dec 92 22:37:48 GMT, gil...@en.ecn.purdue.edu (Tim Gillum) said:
>
>T> In article <SHAFER.92D...@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov> sha...@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov (Mary Shafer) writes:
>>I've got a video tape, currently loaned out, that shows the C-130
>>carrier qualification.
>
>T> I saw in an earlier post that no catapult was used. Was JATO used or is the
>T> deck long enough? I've always wondered.
>
>No JATO (which is actually RATO, but that doesn't much matter) at all.
>
>Since the C-130 is designed to carry quite a heavy load, it's got a
>pretty good climb rate when it's empty. It can really leap off the
>ground. And, of course, it was at sea level.
>--
Make that +45' msl :)
Barney Lum
>> u...@icl.se (Urban F) writes:
>> [ ...but Curtis LeMay was influenced by it enough to recommend
>> side-by-side seating for the B-52, as opposed to tandem...]
> hag...@sabre.den.mmc.com (Dave Hagood) writes:
> Interesting. The XB-52 had tandem seating, a la B-47, but I had never
>heard any reason for the change.
I recall that a reason was for crew physiology. Having side-by-side allowed
for the pilot/co-pilot to look at (and watch) each other, making them feel
less isolated and able to interact better. Other advantages probably
include being able to "get up and around" within the cockpit itself
Speaking of cramped quarters... a BUFF-G (or H) was open for visiting at
Norton AFB (CA). The weapons officer (and another) below the main deck sat
side-by-side in VERY tight and dark (at the time) stations, walled-in by
instrumentation and displays. Fuselage interior width in that "office"
probably wasn't more than five or six feet? Definitely not OSHA-approved...
or for the clausterphobic! :)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>|
>| bar...@usc.edu Barney@USCVM
--> --> --> | ======= --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
>| Permanent Student Pilot, On the Numbers
>|
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Barney Lum
>>carrier qualification.
"Look, Ma.. No Hook!" was the inscription carried by a Herc as it operated
from the Saratoga (or Forrestal?)... props were in full reverse just before
touching down. Wingtip clearance from the carrier's island was said to
be only 15 feet!
>Since the C-130 is designed to carry quite a heavy load, it's got a
>pretty good climb rate when it's empty. It can really leap off the
>ground. And, of course, it was at sea level.
Just as impressive, if not more so, were the 16 B-25 Mitchells that flew
off of the Hornet to bomb Tokyo back in 1942. Even though they faced into
the 30-knot wind, Doolittle's lead plane had only about half the deck
length (400 feet?) to work with.... and they were probably quite loaded even
with all gun turrets removed. They also timed their takeoff runs to coincide
the upswing of the pitching deck with liftoff.
Ron Wanttaja
>In article <urf.724012326@sw2001>, u...@icl.se (Urban F) writes:
>|> I'm reading an article on the Vickers Valiant in Air International,
>|> where it is claimed the USA showed some slight interest in it, to
>|> be used on carriers. Nothing came of that, but Curtis LeMay was
>|> influenced by it enough to recommend side-by-side seating for the
>|> B-52, as opposed to tandem, which it probably would have had otherwise.
>|> --
>
According to Tex Johnston (Boeing test pilot of the XB-52 and YB-52) the
production versions went to side-by-side because of... Curtis LeMay. LeMay
came to Boeing to try out the YB-52 (which, in fact, flew BEFORE the XB-52
did). After landing, he said: "Great plane... change it to side-by-side
seating and I'll buy it."
Johnston (in _Jet Age Test Pilot_) doesn't say *why* LeMay wanted
side-by-side, but says he himself was for it all the way due to improved
crew coordination. It may be that the B-47 had proved the tandem
arrangement too awkward, and LeMay didn't want to continue the trend.
Ron Wanttaja
pr...@plato.ds.boeing.com
John Mosbarger
[.....deleted.....]
: Just as impressive, if not more so, were the 16 B-25 Mitchells that flew
: off of the Hornet to bomb Tokyo back in 1942. Even though they faced into
: the 30-knot wind, Doolittle's lead plane had only about half the deck
: length (400 feet?) to work with.... and they were probably quite loaded even
: with all gun turrets removed. They also timed their takeoff runs to coincide
: the upswing of the pitching deck with liftoff.
Watching (or reading) an interview with one of the Doolittle raiders, he
said that the Hornet had to reduce speed as it was taking water over the bow.
John
--
*****************************************************************************
| John Mosbarger | You know why many people commit suicide |
| | during the holidays? It's because they're |
| HP McMinnville, OR | forced to spend time with their relatives. |
| | --John Belushi |
| jo...@hpmcaa.mcm.hp.com | |
|***************************************************************************|
| Opinions are mine and mine alone. |
*****************************************************************************
Chuck Collins [CONTRACTOR]
>According to Tex Johnston (Boeing test pilot of the XB-52 and YB-52) the
>production versions went to side-by-side because of... Curtis LeMay. LeMay
>came to Boeing to try out the YB-52 (which, in fact, flew BEFORE the XB-52
>did). After landing, he said: "Great plane... change it to side-by-side
>arrangement too awkward, and LeMay didn't want to continue the trend.
A friend of mine who flew the back seat in a B-47 said that in order
for the back seat guy to land, he had to completely unfasten his harness
and stand up in order to see the runway.
Also maybe LeMay already was envisioning his 7-day-long 2-crew missions
where the B-52s circled the North Pole. This is just speculation, but
getting out of the front seat and strolling back for a chat with the
stewardesses in a B-47-like configuration might have been problematical.
-- Chuck Collins