A-6 Intruder

Cold war, Korea, Vietnam, and Desert Storm - up to and including for example the A-10, F-15, Mirage 200, MiG-29, and F-18.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

madrat

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2339
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2010, 03:12

Unread post02 Jun 2019, 04:25

Did the gun-sight or bomb computer help with aiming rockets?
Offline
User avatar

Gums

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2284
  • Joined: 16 Dec 2003, 17:26

Unread post02 Jun 2019, 05:00

Salute!

At Mad......

The "NAVWD" computer in the early days had DTOS for basic bomb delivery ( "visual attack" was the mode). CCRP for radar or "bomb on coordinates". and CCIP for RX and strafe.

The CCIP had a 14,000 foot range for RX and 8,000 feet for strafe. So your bullets or rocks hit where you put the aiming symbol.

This was all back in 1970 -1971. Later mods had CCIP for bombs just like the Viper.

When we Sluf drivers showed up at Hill in 1979 we were surprised that the Viper did not have some of the A-7 ground map radar modes and no radar altimiter. Oh well, the A2A radar was state of the art.

Gums sends...
Gums
Viper pilot '79
"God in your guts, good men at your back, wings that stay on - and Tally Ho!"
Offline

outlaw162

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1329
  • Joined: 28 Feb 2008, 02:33

Unread post02 Jun 2019, 05:08

****** :D
Offline

vilters

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1102
  • Joined: 28 Sep 2009, 00:16

Unread post02 Jun 2019, 14:04

@ Gums

When we first got the F-16 A-B Vipers back in 1979, we always got the impression it was fielded a bit too fast.
Ok, it could pull "G" like hell, but other parts just seemed "unfinished".

Agreed; Those first years was pure and only A2A, but Europe being Europe, and almost all nations coming from the F-104, we soon wanted some more advanced A2G capabilities.
Offline
User avatar

Gums

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2284
  • Joined: 16 Dec 2003, 17:26

Unread post02 Jun 2019, 14:49

Salute!

Yeah, Vilt....s, early ones did not have radar altimiter or the ECM package in the base of the vertical stab. We did have a better fuel control unit than the motors in the Eagle, yet our first losses were due to the motor ( the trapped fuel accident was our first loss, and the OT&E flight members should have helped the pilot with his problem, IMHO. That one happened a week or so after I showed up at Hill).

We were "waiting" for the cosmic CARA that provided radar altitude to 40,000 friggin feet! Our two fatalities did not occur because the radar altimiter could work at 40,000 feet! The rocks are lots lower, dammit, and the existing ubits would have worked just fine and also provide a good altitude for the bombing geometrical calculations, just like the SLUF.

The radar was really good for A2A, and the ground map had the doppler beam sharpening feature to get a great final aimpoint when bombing or doing a airborne radar approach. But no terrain following or terrain avoidance or the cross-scan modes or beacon mode.

Gums sends....
Gums
Viper pilot '79
"God in your guts, good men at your back, wings that stay on - and Tally Ho!"
Offline

vilters

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1102
  • Joined: 28 Sep 2009, 00:16

Unread post02 Jun 2019, 21:51

That "trapped fuel incident?" Was that not with a Belgian pilot?
I remember we had one in the States in that period…….(Forgot, to close the Air refuelling door, and fuel trapped in the external wing tanks)

And our first accident in Belgium was also motor related.
Most however, certainly in the beginning was GLOC related. . . Let's see what this thing can really do.... was high on the fatality list.
Offline
User avatar

Gums

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2284
  • Joined: 16 Dec 2003, 17:26

Unread post02 Jun 2019, 23:00

Salute!

Yep, Vilts...... twas a Belgian and on the OT&E team that shared planes with we 6th TFTS folks.

Not sure how many Belgian folks did AAR in other planes, but his buddies did not help and go thru the checklist items that would have prevented the crash. Worse, he was in a B model, so flaps came down below "x" speed and by flying at optimum speed he used more gas than going fast. Same thing I did as a nugget for my A-37 flameoiut. If I had gone full power on remaining engine I could have deadsticked at Bien Hoa versus the international airport at Saigon. My leaking fuel lines were pumping out gas faster than I could burn it, heh heh.

His flameout pattern was pretty good, and he should have jettisoned the tanks, even at the bitter end. The plane hit on the overrun and the fuel burned it to ashes. Seat worked well, and we all gained confidence in that thing, as he punched really low, A month or two later, D. Bell had an engine come unglued and main fuel tanks were on fire. Spectacular video from a wingie and he finally punched - first USAF loss

I have refrained from mentioning the nationality for 40 years on public forums. It was the first loss of a Viper, and it was not due to a mechanical problem. I did not want to attribute the loss to another country.

Gums sends...
Gums
Viper pilot '79
"God in your guts, good men at your back, wings that stay on - and Tally Ho!"
Offline

blufoperations

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 3
  • Joined: 24 May 2019, 02:12

Unread post08 Jun 2019, 04:24

First A6 prototype YA2F-1
Attachments
A6 (YA2F) BuNo 147864.jpg
Offline

blufoperations

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 3
  • Joined: 24 May 2019, 02:12

Unread post08 Jun 2019, 04:26

One of the last patches for the west coast A6 Intruders at NAS Whidbey Island, Washington. This one if for the local AIMD (Intermediate) maint facility.
Attachments
LastScan.jpg
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3495
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post08 Jun 2019, 13:36

blufoperations wrote:First A6 prototype YA2F-1


Wow! Wonder what year this was? I guess the black and white vs. color might be a clue, LOL. In all candor, it matured into a fantastic design carrying big loads a great distance and putting them on target even in weather. And these were simple, unguided mk 82's mostly, if I'm not mistaken.

The one thing I didn't like about the A-6 is that it was a sitting duck had it been jumped. The R/A-5C was fast as hell, so it could use its speed to escape. The A-7 carried two sidewinders standard, and at least looked like it could maneuver if you punched everything off. The Phantom had obvious kinematic/weapons advantages. But the poor A-6 looked like a guppy, was rarely (if ever?) seen with defensive armament and didn't even have a gun.

Amazing it served so effectively over a long, distinguished career...
Offline

outlaw162

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1329
  • Joined: 28 Feb 2008, 02:33

Unread post08 Jun 2019, 14:53

The one thing I didn't like about the A-6 is that it was a sitting duck had it been jumped.


Flying as adversary air at the Marine WTI's, we'd mix it up with them occasionally. For daylight stuff, they generally had a couple of F-4s with them.

With that big wing, they had good turn performance (kind of A-10ish) and in the days of rear aspect only weapons they could do a pretty good job of holding off an attacker (also kind of A-10ish) until the F-4s could bail 'em out.

With the side by side arrangement, you could be pretty sure the fight would always be in a left turn. :D
Previous

Return to Military Aircraft of the Cold War

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests