Stupid questions about Naval Aviation (Pt 2)

[Alpha_Echo_606]

So Uncle Fester what your telling me is; me working flight ops to flight ops getting 2 or 3 hours sleep a night was just a dream?

Truth be known, I was never big on Midrats; It cut in to my rack time.

 

[HeyJoe]

but how the bloody hell does a Commander spend ANY time around a carrier and not know that we do most of our flying at night and it's not a 9-to-5 gig?

Never saw a Chop 0-5 come up even to the Hangar Bay. Most of their domain and office thrives below that level so no surprise that you could bump into one who probably didn't have a clue what's going on relative to the flight deck. Some are good people and well-rounded and some stick to their own world (kind you ran into).

 

[brownshoe]

...Midrats wasn't a "real" meal...

WHAT? Midrats wasn't a "real" meal!?! Bullshit, that was the best meal of the day! Ashore at, Cecil (my day) the OOD arm badge was passed around to all of the officers at the line shack/hangar who wanted to eat at the EM mess hall, everybody knew, nary a soul said shit!

Steve

 

[Gatordev]

...Wardroom Officer (O-2 Chop type) sent a mass-mail to the Air Wing announcing that since Midrats wasn't a "real" meal, he was securing all the grills and it'd just be cold cuts and cereal.

I guess night-check isn't a real duty section, either.

On top of that, her mess cranks made a habit of stealing all the "good" cereal (Coco Krispies, Frosted Mini Wheats) out of the wardrooms when they did break-outs. A squadron O-4 was up early one morning, for unfathomable Hinge reasons, and caught a conga line of mess cranks carrying armloads of cereal back to their berthing.

From my most recent stint of living w/ Shoes... The XO would come down and do the same thing. Every Frosted Mini-wheats (which is gold!) box would be gone. But oh, the stories I could tell about that guy don't stop at mini-wheats...

 

[phrogpilot73]

A squadron O-4 was up early one morning, for unfathomable Hinge reasons, and caught a conga line of mess cranks carrying armloads of cereal back to their berthing.

It's not just hinges. Even when I was on the night page - I'd set an alarm, stumble to the wardroom for breakfast, stumble back to the rack. Two reasons (neither hinge related) - One, those fuckers were charging me for every meal underway... I was going to eat every meal underway. Two, on our boat the food was horrible (with the exception of breakfast) so I liked to get one good meal per day.

 

[Xtndr50boom]

... stealing the "good" cereal (Coco Krispies, Frosted Mini Wheats) out of the wardrooms....

Thanks for the reality check, gentlemen: Most of us AF types (myself included) considered it a crime against humanity when our deployed chow hall ran out of cinnamon toast crunch and we were left with "only" cocoa puffs, honey cheerios, frosted mini-wheats, etc, etc.

 

[phrogdriver]

My lasting memory of doing all this stuff was coming back aboard after a 14-hour boarding in the tropical sun. Worn out as fuck, but feeling good because we made a bust. Then one of my fellow Ensigns comes in and makes a bitchy remark about how he had to take my watch because I was out on the RHIB and I now "owe him," and the Chop tells me to keep my guys off the mess decks ("But they need something to eat." "They should have come by during meal hours." "Suppo, they were on the boarding during meal hours. With me." "Then it's your problem, First, not mine.").

SWOdom sucks. Believe it.

OMFG. I'm flabbergasted.

I've never had anyone pull that kind of BS--I'd be at least momentarily speechless in shock over the inanity of the words coming out of their mouths. It's not as if they were playing PS3 during chow hours.

"But feeding the sailors on this ship is YOUR problem. And f--- you."

If making sure the members of a command properly supplied and fed isn't the suppO's job, whose is it?

If standing watch during contingency ops isn't a SWO's job, whose is it?

 

[SynixMan]

Texaco

Being as how the KA-6D was a different airframe than the A-6 (from my google-fu), was there just a set number allocated per A-6 squadron, or to each Air Wing? And was assignment to one a regular rotation or a special qual? Good deal/bad deal flight?

 

[A4sForever]

Being as how the KA-6D was a different airframe than the A-6 (from my google-fu), was there just a set number allocated per A-6 squadron, or to each Air Wing? And was assignment to one a regular rotation or a special qual? Good deal/bad deal flight?

photo by A4sForever

It was a good deal ... a very good deal ... and a sometimes unappreciated good deal, except by those pilots who were "BAGGERS", and those 'other' birds who desperately needed fuel either comin' back FEET-WET or those just bangin' around the pattern @ night.

The KA-6D was a true mission/strike tanker in every sense of the word. I'm guessing @ 25% of my A-6 traps were as a result of TEXACO ...

The most dangerous flying I ever experienced -- and that includes all of it -- was after receiving the command to "HAWK aircraft so-and-so 5 miles astern on the BALL" @ night. The most "experienced" crews had the last tanker down @ night -- and for good reason. I never realized the importance of tankers when I went into the ATTACK Community ...

They removed the high dollar "guts" of the A-6 attack/nav system and just left the basics in ... theoretically -- TEXACO "could" have gone "downtown" and delivered weapons up to and including a NUKE had the balloon gone up -- but only as a last ditch maneuver by the AirWing.

The tankers sometimes stayed in WestPac and were swapped out amongst the INCHOP/OUTCHOP squadrons @ CUBI, but the "normal" rotation/handover took place @ ALAMEDA/NORIS -- or at least the bulk of 'em did -- at the 'usual' rate of 4/squadron, although that could increase to 5 on occasion. Normal complement was 12-14 bombers and 4 tankers. The only tankers I ever saw in CONUS turnarounds were going in or coming out of some variant of AIMD and were occasionally "borrowed" by a squadron and/or the RAG for 'plugging' training ...

Your "Google-fu" is stumbling today ... it was the same airframe, same airplane, Grasshopper ... just "older". Fully functional as a basic airframe and very, very highly prized by CAG and everyone in the AirWing.

Today ... I would be a tanker instead of an ATTACK "tip of the spear" ...

 

[HeyJoe]

It was a good deal ... a very good deal ... and a sometimes unappreciated good deal....

The most dangerous flying I ever experienced -- and that includes all of it -- was after recieving the command to "HAWK aircraft so-and-so 5 miles astern on the BALL" @ night. The most "experienced" crews had the last tanker down @ night -- and for good reason. I never realized the importance of tankers when I went into the ATTACK Community ...

From the receiver (or plugging) perspective, I guarantee that anyone flying Texaco was VERY appreciated especially in circumstances when you're being "hawked" and counting on the tanker to be there when you're told "Your signal, tank". Even better was when you recognized the typically senior voice from Texaco calmly saying "I've got you" and moments later (although it could seem like an enternity due to time-compression) after you climb out of the "penalty box" into a dark sky looking for the special tanker beacon in the inky black sky, a basket seems to appear out of nowhere in the darkness....This is also Naval Aviation at its best right up there with intrepid helo folks that hand it out to pluck avistors out of the sea after endless hours of uneventful plane guard duty. Powers to be were very, very smart to fols tanker mission into attack squadrons. Pretty sure dedicated tanker dets would have grown such incredible feats of airmanship.

Texaco on station

HJ Photos

 

[ea6bflyr]

While always appreciative of the tankers, I always had a hard time figuring out the aspect angle of an S-3 at night (non-NVG Prowler guy). It seems that their lights were not alway on bright. Anyone else have problems joining at night on an S-3?

-ea6bflyr

 

[SynixMan]

Your "Google-fu" is stumbling today ... it was the same airframe, same airplane, Grasshopper ... just "older".

Sorry, I was getting at the fact that the KA-6D airframe was modified (removal of DIANE and other parts as you said to make room for the tanking equipment), not just a regular A-6 with the tanks added. Could a "regular" A-6E take the buddy tank with integrated basket like the S-3 did and Rhino does now?

For the Rhino guys, is the 5 Wet config put together when needed or is there a standard tanking bird in each squadron? Will retract if that's pushing OPSEC...

This thread is gold by the way, I think I've read it at least 3 times beginning to end.

 

[Brett327]

For the Rhino guys, is the 5 Wet config put together when needed or is there a standard tanking bird in each squadron? Will retract if that's pushing OPSEC...

This thread is gold by the way, I think I've read it at least 3 times beginning to end.

Air wing dependent, but 5-wet was a pretty standard config in mine.

Brett

 

[A4sForever]

.... Could a "regular" A-6E take the buddy tank with integrated basket like the S-3 did and Rhino does now?...

All the time ... A-6A's and E's ... actually, not so much the A's, but definitely the E's as the KA's were starting to wear a little thin after so much usage "during the war" ... the 'A's had other things to do besides pass gas during the period ...

The greatest "sin" an A-6 squadron commander could commit was to run out of tankers ... CAG no-like. :icon_rage

Sooooooooooooo ... in an effort to pump up the TEXACO capabilities or keep them at a 'higher' level, provide a viable backup if a KA went down for a launch or the package was 'sour', and provide more all-around, general purpose 'mini-tanker' flexibility ... the bombers were sometimes (often from @ 1974 onward, in my experience) fitted w/ a "BUDDY STORE" on the centerline. They could fly their mission, treat it like a drop tank, and still maintain a 'gas to give' potential for anyone in the Air Wing in an extremis situation.

It was a waste of a valuable bomber assets to make the A/E models dedicated 'tankers' ... so the troops & MX worked very hard to keep the ol' KA girls up and ready.

Bomber (r) w/ D-704 "Buddy Store" on centerline ...


photo by A4sForever

KA-6D TEXACO tanker (l) w/ blue stripe around fuselage (for recognition) giving gas to an A-6E (r) w/ a D-704 on the centerline ...


photo by A4sForever

 

[Uncle Fester]

For the Rhino guys, is the 5 Wet config put together when needed or is there a standard tanking bird in each squadron?

From what I've been told by the Rhino dudes, it's squadron SOP. Some skippers prefer to have one or two jets designated as the permanent tankers, others prefer flexibility. I think a lot of that stuff is still being figured out by the community at large, and it's going to get even weirder in the coming years as VAQ gets into tanking and the Hawkeyes show up with their refueling probes.

From watching the guys do it in the hangar bay, it seemed like hella work to move the tanker pods between jets, and not something to be done if you had a choice.

CAG still hates it when the Rhino guys run out of tankers.