Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

All but dropping the weapon

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

All but dropping the weapon

Old 17th Apr 2015, 15:44
  #81 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 61
Posts: 5,529
Originally Posted by oxenos View Post
... and Tourist's only interest in aviation is pulling birds.
Tourist is in good company, if that's even remotely close to true. I doubt that we in the USN were the only ones who considered our wings to be "chick magnets."
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 17th Apr 2015, 15:48
  #82 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: 75' from the runway edge and 150' from the threshold
Age: 70
Posts: 165
Russian Submarine in Irish Sea?

Trawler from Ardglas, NI, snagged by submarine.:

Trawler skipper tells of 'submarine dragging incident' in Irish Sea | UK news | The Guardian

No MPA - No deterrent?
ACW342 is offline  
Old 17th Apr 2015, 16:35
  #83 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Argentina
Age: 44
Posts: 66
mmm, a russian submarine... or another blue-on-blue?

Back in the days, they blamed the soviets also, but own boats are mostly responsible.

The day an Irish fishing boat was sunk by a British submarine (Specially this one - mostly because HMS Porpoise was hidden after the incident, but one worker spoke to the press about the damage, and no longer the soviets were the culprits)

Revealed: MoD admits to 16 nuclear submarine crashes | Herald Scotland

So on and so on.
Marcantilan is offline  
Old 17th Apr 2015, 17:56
  #84 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 77
Posts: 16,680
If it was a bomber sneaking south through St George's Channel then it clearly wasn't one of ours, if you see what I mean.

Then if it was out of Barrow then it wasn't one of ours either.

Then if it was one of ours it clearly wasn't as we don't do that sort of thing and own up immediately.


Pontius Navigator is online now  
Old 17th Apr 2015, 19:33
  #85 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Outside the Matz
Posts: 219
I smell BS,
Did the fisherman say how big it was before it got away ?

JW always atracts dubious claims followed by compensation request.

Lets see how long it is before the tree huggers start blaiming the Navy for a dead haddock washed up on a beach!

Theres no sex like a Casex!
Bannock is offline  
Old 18th Apr 2015, 07:29
  #86 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: North of England
Posts: 76
Now what do I do ?!

Everyone knows that the one the girls really go for is/was the Nimrod AEO
Jeez Shadwell, did you HAVE to spill those beans ?! I've spent years successfully concealing how awesome I was
Dimmer Switch is offline  
Old 18th Apr 2015, 07:44
  #87 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,519
TOFO, I assure you that it was 100% true.
The point escapes you beags...

Whether the tale is established in an actual incident or not, is irrelevant. It is bollocks because it purports to represent a problem that never, ever existed (and not in a banterish way either).

As fergineer so adroitly points out, we all knew what out job was and we got on with it as the ace team we were - "labels" were irrelevant. Of course we had knobs, but they did not get awarded captaincy...or for that matter, lead operator slots or first nav slots.

Regrettably, quite a few AEOs were of the knobbish variety, mainly in the early days, but that was entirely because OASC had an iron fist over AEO selection. If the fleet had had a veto, that would never have happened either.

Apologies for the thread drift.

PS

Tourist...thinking back quite a while now, we had our fair share of legendary ladies men and they were pretty much all rear crew. More time on their hands to hone their skills I guess.
The Old Fat One is offline  
Old 18th Apr 2015, 08:07
  #88 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Town
Posts: 2
Sounds like it was more fun when it was all blue seas and air shows rather than sandy deserts! Even on R&R the 'behaviour expectations' blunties were always close enough. Something else that I'm sure will rattle BEagle is that there's often more graduates down the back than sitting at the front since he retired. And yes some of that education could make a difference in the outcome of the more technical parts of the mission.
LeadDry is offline  
Old 18th Apr 2015, 08:23
  #89 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Australia
Age: 83
Posts: 56
TOFO
Regrettably, quite a few AEOs were of the knobbish variety, mainly in the early days, but that was entirely because OASC had an iron fist over AEO selection. If the fleet had had a veto, that would never have happened either.


You're not whistling Dixie there Tofo.


Mo
John Botwood is offline  
Old 18th Apr 2015, 09:06
  #90 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: France
Age: 76
Posts: 6,381
I recall at least one AEOp turning up at the Towers in the earlyish 80s and DDIOT being told that the student would pass, come what may, as his skills were required to fill a commissioned post. ISTR he actually did rather well on IOT, but the "system" seemed to have the whip hand in at least that case, not IOT.
Wander00 is offline  
Old 18th Apr 2015, 09:51
  #91 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: London
Age: 54
Posts: 432
OP Reply - Small Apology

As the OP I’d like to say thanks all for the replies even if some did some of them did stretch credibility a bit.
I mean, female choosing FJ Pilot over Nimrod Crew.

As if.

Imagine the scene. Nimrod crew member and FJ Pilot vying for attention of very attractive lady.

She already knows what the FJ Pilot does because he told everyone within the first 30 seconds of meeting them and then spent the next 60 seconds explaining that he doesn’t have a rare facial birthmark it is the marks of his Oxygen mask, which he has to use because “I like to fly really high, don’t I”

She asks the Nimrod chap “What do you do in the RAF then”.

Nimrod God takes a small sip of his ice cold Chardonnay, looks into her eyes and says “I’m afraid what I do is so secret that even the Prime Minister does not know what it is. But because of our incredible endurance we stay up for absolute ages, making sure every position we find our self in is perfect, and that after the mission climax we can get back on task with a very short turnaround time”

Quick flash of the pearly whites and a suggestive wink and that’s it.

Job Jobbed.

But on a somewhat more serious note.

I am finding it slightly hard to articulate exactly what I mean but it is along these lines.

I’m thinking mainly of the Cold War years so no offense meant to any aircrew post 1990 or thereabouts

Air Defenders and the Strike/Recce groups obviously practiced their missions and at Spade had the privilege of seeing them in simulated action. As a young ScopeDope fresh out of training at Drayton having learnt about CRC/CRP’s, Type 84/85, Nodding Height Finders, UKADR etc.

I suddenly found myself having to learn what a ‘4 Ship FRA on Prior Lancey’ meant along with a whole crap load of new TLAs and Exercise names.

A10’s on CAS, Jags doing BAI, F4G Weasels doing SEAD and GR1s on OCA. Not to mention that F-111’s wanted to bomb various villages in Cumbria for some reason.

The Air Defenders were there as well. RAF F4s, USAF F15s and F16 on things like Mallet Blow.

And all of them lost aircrew at some point practising for what they all hoped would never come, but if it did come they would be the very best at the job they had to do.

But I think the point I was trying to make with ‘All but dropping the weapon’ was that the MPA fleet were practising against, for the most part, the actual Soviet Subs and Surface craft they would engage in War. And over the actual ‘ground’ they would be doing it over. The plans they made and missions they flew would require very little changes to go from ‘Track Target’ to ‘Engage Target’.

I know that is a simplification but I hope it makes sense and please correct me if I am wrong.

So when I said ‘A Silent War’ I meant it as no disrespect to any of the other Aircrew that flew the vast disparate types that hurled themselves all over Europe during that period.

Thinking about it I should give a nod to the Royal Navy Hunter-Killers and ASW types bit this an aviation forum after all and ANY RAF Aircrew trade would pull the lady before the Navy got a look in.

By the way I believe a poster thought I should have said ‘All but dropping a weapon’ instead of ‘the Weapon’. I think they felt I was implying a nuke but I wasn’t. The weapon could have been a Torpedo, depth charge etc.

Did MPA carry depth charges?

Have a good weekend all.
ExRAFRadar is offline  
Old 18th Apr 2015, 12:13
  #92 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,400
ExRAFRadar

Beautifully done. You had me going with that post.

Hook line and sinker.

I would never have realised it was a waaa if it wasn't for the "ANY RAF Aircrew trade would pull the lady before the Navy got a look in." line.

Just too outrageous for even a crab to believe.
Tourist is offline  
Old 18th Apr 2015, 13:23
  #93 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: London
Age: 54
Posts: 432


Hope Courtney is in a good mood or I am toast.
ExRAFRadar is offline  
Old 18th Apr 2015, 14:15
  #94 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 77
Posts: 16,680
ERR, good post, the only depth charge on the Nimrod was about 10kt

Quite right, the Nimrod got to play with many of the live radars although many, for obvious reason were not heard much. For those radars we used the SIM with, hopefully, the proper modes and tactics. Playing with the real hardware was easier and sometimes we got some cracking results even a sonobuoy inside a submarine.
Pontius Navigator is online now  
Old 18th Apr 2015, 16:10
  #95 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 175
Everyone knows that the one the girls really go for is/was the Nimrod AEO. To a man they are handsome, possess a sparkling wit, were intelligent and like the aircraft, they have a long satisfying endurance (and are much bigger where it matters) - all the qualities the ladies seek. AEO's like the aircraft they used to fly (and often captained), had a long endurance, whereas with the fast jet boys it was all over quickly (unless they had a refuel (Viagra?)).
You know the saying, Shadwell:

"It's not all about the size of the boat, it's about the motion in the ocean." That's the difference between FJ and ME!
JointShiteFighter is offline  
Old 19th Apr 2015, 10:28
  #96 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 640
Did one of the early Nimrod courses (1970 ), and depth charges were still on the list of cleared weapons. Saw some loaded on an aircraft we were due to fly, planning to drop them for training. (We had dropped some for training on the Shack course , 1964 ) They were rusty as hell, you could just make out the date of manufacture, 1944, and they were weeping some nasty looking liquid. We said we were not happy with them, they were off loaded, and shortly afterwards they disappeared from the menu.

Last edited by oxenos; 20th Apr 2015 at 14:48.
oxenos is offline  
Old 20th Apr 2015, 12:51
  #97 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 61
Posts: 5,529
The bucket of sunshine that was usable could be deployed by S-3's but I don't recall whether or not our P-3's had it in their cert: probably did. Memory foggy regarding the halcyon days of playing tag with Ivan.

There was at least one rotary wing that could carry same bucket of sunshine, but there was some question about whether it was fast enough to get out of the blast radius once it delivered.

This whole lash up reminded me of that tactical nuke Mortar the Army developed back in the 50's.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 20th Apr 2015, 13:26
  #98 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,400
Yes, our seaking certainly had the bucket. We could fly away not too bad. The wasp, however...
Tourist is offline  
Old 20th Apr 2015, 18:39
  #99 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hertfordshire
Age: 53
Posts: 772
This whole lash up reminded me of that tactical nuke Mortar the Army developed back in the 50's.
I assume your thinking of the M-28 / M-29 'Davey Crockett' nuclear recoilless gun. It only had a variable yield of 10 or 20 tonnes (yes, 0.020 kT), though the radiation was at instant lethal levels at ranges of over 400 meters, the weapon itself having a range 2000 meters. Needless to say if you fired it with the wrong winds or at too close a target the weapon effects would kill the operators, but in correct operation the weapons 17 second flight time gave the firing party enough time to dive into a slit trench to avoid the majority of the weapon effects. The stated fact that the weapon instant effects exceeded the weapon's maximum range is a load of BS. This site has a good powerpoint presentation link on it showing the attack profile of a WE-177 NDB from a Helicopter (along with the V-force / FJ attack options for the weapon) which is not as suicidal as it sounds.

http://www.nuclear-weapons.info/vw.htm
MAINJAFAD is offline  
Old 20th Apr 2015, 20:41
  #100 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 61
Posts: 5,529
Originally Posted by MAINJAFAD View Post
I assume your thinking of the M-28 / M-29 'Davey Crockett' nuclear recoilless gun.
Thanks for the details. As we mere mortals hardly control wind direction and velocity, the DC remains a "sorta good idea but not really" from where I sit. I do realize that it was a product of its times.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.