The Monster COD thread (homage to the C-2A Greyhound)

[kmac]

For props, if we went to two engines, they would have been so big that they'd be moved too far outboard and then you couldn't fit on the elevator. Plus, it starts to look like the A/C that began this whole discussion....

You have to lose the prop mindset. They're not good for the mission. Think speed and low cost.

 

[cosmania]

I think the Handler on every ship that had to catch one of those would be on a murder-suicide watch. He would likely murder the designer and then kill himself.

While I'm no expert on CV integration, my experience has been that a large aircraft can shut down the flight deck more effectively than many small ones. I would guess that at a design meeting all the handlers would rather have a four CA-4s before they took one CN-130.

 

[Beans]

kmac, I know what you're saying, and we tried to address some of those things, and others we just left off.
But we were motivated in part by the problems encountered by the YC-14 in the late 70s. See here: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/c-14.htm . To counter the engine-out problem, we'd need a very fancy rudder and a long tail, which would make fitting below deck difficult.

 

[bunk22]

kmac, I know what you're saying, and we tried to address some of those things, and others we just left off.
But we were motivated in part by the problems encountered by the YC-14 in the late 70s. See here: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/c-14.htm . To counter the engine-out problem, we'd need a very fancy rudder and a long tail, which would make fitting below deck difficult.

While in Atsugi, I watched some Japanese STOL transports to stop and go's. They took off in such a short distance, it was amazing. A smaller version, made carrier suitable, might be the stick.

 

[bunk22]

Unfortunately there are a lot of issues here and there that arise on a daily basis that the boat guys just don't know about. Don't get me wrong, it is very rewarding to sleep in a stable (and usually silent) room, have a beer at the end of the day, and get to see some new places on the no-fly-days. However, most guys don't understand all of the intricacies of flying C-2s.
*Mission is officially planned by Strike Ops, but really is directed by Suppo, CAGMO, Flag Air Ops/PAO (for DV warfare), and Cag Ops O (still not sure why, but it is always the case). Each one is giving you different information and yet we're supposed to be planning on how best to do operations (assisting Strike Ops).
*The Handler hates CODs. That's a rule.
*External factors almost always lead in delays. Is the COD missing the overhead time? Does it have civilians on the inside of it? Now you understand why the CODs are late. Punctuality in some foreign countries doesn't mean the same thing as it does in the US military. Hell, I had some fuel guys go out to lunch 5 minutes before our fuel reservation (Thailand). We didn't get to take off for another 3 hours. Another example is when there is a 1000 Fed Ex flight arriving and yet there's a 1215 overhead time. That means the Fed Ex has to arrive, the beach det has to get whatever gadget they need, get it through customs, then drive it over to us, load the plane, and get us out the door in less than an hour. That's pushing it in an ideal world. I certainly don't envy Strike Ops when having to incorporate CODs into the schedule.
*The USAF isn't very flexible. That's also a fact.
*Ship's beach det. Some folks are very competent and some ship's entire beach det is horrible. They can make or break a mission just as much as the aircraft being up or down, but when the C-2 is late to the ship... it's the COD guys' fault. Most guys on the ship don't realize how important a role the beach det is. Unfortunately some think it's just a "good deal on the beach" and rotate folks through who really have no right being there.

Anyway, I'm not ranting at all. I love what I do and sometimes you just have to shrug your shoulders.

Good info. The COD guys will certainly always bear the brunt of any issue. The ship doesn't understand limited cargo carrying capacity due to cubing out or weather and distance........meaning I have to limite how much cargo due to the ship being 700 miles away and with 95 degrees and 100% humidity, I can only carry so much cargo due to single engine climb capability. The ship often doesn't understand that where we base and where the ship is are in two different time zones. On both my dets, we provided both written and email copies of the limitations and COD specific rules for all major parties involved. They are never read. Pretty much a waste. Regardless, what COD's do is a small part of the operational function of that ship. The ship could sustain combat operations without us, if need be. It may be difficult to deal with at times but we knew our place.

 

[HeyJoe]

To counter the engine-out problem, we'd need a very fancy rudder and a long tail, which would make fitting below deck difficult.

^^^^ Already needed and addressed by the S-3 Viking ^^^^

 

[Flash]

Unfortunately there are a lot of issues.........Anyway, I'm not ranting at all. I love what I do and sometimes you just have to shrug your shoulders.

Oay, okay......it was a joke........

 

[Flash]

While in Atsugi, I watched some Japanese STOL transports to stop and go's. They took off in such a short distance, it was amazing. A smaller version, made carrier suitable, might be the stick.

You talking about this?

 

[kmac]

Flash, have you seen the inside of their cockpits? Talk about old gear. And here I was thinking that a fine Grumman product such as the C-2 had all the old gizmos... boy was I wrong.

And my previous post about the mission of the C-2 was more a reflection on how little the boat people really goes on. All of those issues give me added reason to drink a beer at the end of the day.

 

[FrankTheTank]

Another example is when there is a 1000 Fed Ex flight arriving and yet there's a 1215 overhead time. That means the Fed Ex has to arrive

We'll be there... 'The World on Time'

 

[bunk22]

You talking about this?

Yep, thats it. Actually, I think I was at Iwakuni. There was also a funky looking sea/rescue plane in the pattern.

 

[Flash]

Yep, thats it. Actually, I think I was at Iwakuni. There was also a funky looking sea/rescue plane in the pattern.

The US-1, now they are slow........

They even have a new version of it, they are trying to market it as a water bomber........

 

[A4sForever]

The US-1, now they are slow........

^ But so was the tortise.

Not too hard to see the lineage in the Shin Meiwa's of the Kawanishi company ... Kawanishi H8K "Emily" in this case ... those ol' girls have been around since the days prior to WW2 ... the Nips always had a fondness for seaplanes and floats ... a relatively "cheap" way to utilize the vast expanses of the Pacific and it's lagoons .... they always were quite advanced with using air and the Pacific.

 

[scoober78]

True enough...but we didn't do to badly ourselves from time to time.

I would still pay big money to do a Trans-Lant or -Pac the good old way...in a 314.

 

[A4sForever]

See any similarities between the PAA Martin M-130 and the Kawanishi H6K "Mavis" ... ???

It kinda makes one wonder what DID happen to the Hawaiian Clipper ... lost July 1938 east of Manila while enroute from Guam.