Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Fred last won the day on April 17 2020

Fred had the most liked content!

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Fred's Achievements


Newbie (1/14)

  • Conversation Starter Rare
  • First Post Rare
  • Collaborator Rare
  • Week One Done
  • One Month Later Rare

Recent Badges



  1. 62-1859...the one and only '62 model in the wing, while I was there Nov '80 - Oct '90. I remember 497 for a couple of things...Night vis nine-ship ORI mission in the ROK. We were #9 (again). I remarked how good 497's SKE was working, cuz if it was IFR, we'd surely have some problem with it. Another time with 497 was doing a short partial FCF at Clark for something, and left main didn't extend all the way when it was time to land. The co-pilot Ben went back to assist, and they determined that some kind of cover on the inside of the strut had worked loose enough to cause a jam. Some persuasion rectified the situation, and all was then well.The others you mention were still there at Yokota in the late '80's, doing their duty after the wing moved up from Clark in '88. I flew 497 just a couple of months before I PCS'd. We still did most of the tac training down at Clark. The classified mission the wing had while I was there was on the schedule as "AF SAM" (Special Assignment Mission). There were two grey airplanes 73-1597 and 73-1598. Bldg 7709 (as I recall) at Clark was where the 21st was and in the back on the west side, was a room that they told me used to be where "E Flight" did their stuff. I guess it had been a vault, because it was definitely heavier duty construction. I never asked about"E" flight cuz was none of my business, and I made it a rule not to know anything classified unless I had to. If we had to refer to one of those AF SAMs, it was called "a projects mission". We worked for Thirteenth Air Force in this case, and Fifth AF later on. 73-1598 is a "gate guard" at Great Falls airport and 73-1597 became Coors cans or something. My last PACAF trip was with 73-1597 a week before i PCS'd. Clark-Cubi-Kadena-Iwakuni-Yokota. We had the channel mission for a while cuz 141's were very busy.
  2. Curious as to when the final "legacy" Herk was delivered: To whom, when, where, serial number, etc. ? Thanks. I did a search, but no joy.
  3. Sorry, missed this one...nope, I am not.
  4. Pardon my ignorance please. I wasn't an airlifter back in the day, although I spent a year of my life at lovely Ubon Ratchtani on the banks of the lovely "Moon River" '71/'72.
  5. https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/mds.htm
  6. I have no idea whether the Special Assignment Airlift (SAM) missions, Heavy Jump/Sage Owl, flown by the 374 TAW during the 80's are still classified. Probably. 1598 avoided the beer can material fate. https://www.greatfallstribune.com/story/news/local/2016/05/02/aircraft-retired-flight-hours/83847258/ https://www.dvidshub.net/video/461674/c-130-retirement-broll Nice to see that. Kudos to the 120th Airlift Wing guys! 1597 Was at Birmingham last info I've seen from the roster on this website
  7. Fred


    https://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20200423-0 😲 Surprised to see a USAF mishap on this website. I don't recall any previously.
  8. "Triple seven" was still at Yokota 374TAW/345TAS in the late 80's
  9. You will have to be more specific. Are you asking "is it possible"? Or are you asking "is it allowed? Possible? Sure! This a "gray area" So many factors apply to the problem that it is impossible to say yes or no. We hope that the pilot in command is qualified to make a judgment about aborting a touch and go, and has thought about "what if?" Allowed? Depends upon whose airplane you're flying and their rules. If I remember correctly, one USAF command specified a minimum of 5,000 feet runway available for a 50% flap touch-and-go landing. Does having the minimum required guarantee a safe operation? No. Could you apply the logic of: "If the minimum wasn't good enough; it wouldn't be the minimum" ? Yes, but under some conditions, that could get you killed...
  10. Well, here I have been wrong all these years! I thought I remembered from my two years of Spanish in school 60 years ago that it would be "Buenas Dias". Had to look it up and now I know! But, the generic, including C-130H "form F", is here https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/forms/dd/dd0365-4.pdf I hope useful to you
  11. Pictures I've seen looks like #3 and #4 props mostly missing, rt external mostly missing, left refueling pod missing, #1 prop severely damaged, gear up, flaps up. Fuel "leak". The crew audio I've heard mentions two engines out. Does anyone have information as to the status of # 1, whether they were getting any thrust from it? Damaged during flight or the "slide-out"?
  12. That's what we called a "whiz wheel" for calculating take-off and landing speeds and some other important airplane performance information. Very useful and practical device. I don't remember seeing one in use after the 70's or maybe early 80s. The Air Force started requiring the flight engineer to use the charts and tables from the big thick Performance Manual. For some reason. I Never heard the official reason. They made it through Vietnam with plenty of hairy short field or dirt field ops with the wheel, but suddenly it wasn't "good" enough I suppose. I would keep the manual together with the device. I've got an "E" model wheel, but somewhere the case and manual went missing. My $0.02
  13. Hmmm...I know Wikapedia isn't necessarily the gospel in every case; but... Design and development At first, the United States Air Force intended the conversion to be an easy matter of removing the carrier-specific features, so no prototypes were ordered, just five pre-production RB-66A models (the reconnaissance mission being considered a high priority). The list of modifications grew, and before long, the supposedly easy conversion became what was substantially a new aircraft. Many of the changes were due to the USAF's requirement for low-level operations, while the Navy version had originally been designed and employed as a high-altitude nuclear strike bomber. Two major differences between the A-3 and the B-66 consisted in the types of jet engines used, and the emergency crew escape systems. The A-3 had two J57 turbojet engines, whereas the B-66 had two Allison J71s. The B-66 was equipped with ejection seats whereas the A-3 was not. The first RB-66A pre-production aircraft flew in 1954, whereas the first production RB-66B aircraft flew in the beginning of 1955. The basic B-66 design proved to be a versatile one, and was produced or modified into a variety of other versions, including the EB-66, RB-66, and the WB-66. Likewise, many variants of the A-3 Skywarrior were produced. Operational history RB-66B of 19 Tactical Reconnaissance Squadron based at RAF Sculthorpe England in 1957 Deliveries to the Air Force began in 1956, with 145 of this model produced. RB-66s were used as the primary night photo-reconnaissance aircraft of the USAF during this time, many examples serving with tactical reconnaissance squadrons based in the United Kingdom and in West Germany. A total of 72 of the B-66B bomber version were built, 69 fewer than originally planned. A total of 13 B-66B aircraft later were modified into EB-66B electronic countermeasures (ECM) aircraft for the cold war with Russia, and were stationed at RAF Chelveston with the 42nd Tactical Reconnaissance Squadron who did the conversion in the early 1960s. They would rotate out of an alert pad in Spain during the time that the 42nd had them. These and the RB-66Cs that the 42nd had would eventually be sent to Vietnam. Unlike the U.S. Navy's A-3 Skywarrior, which performed some bombing missions, the Destroyer was not used as a bomber in Vietnam. Specifications (B-66) General characteristics Crew: 3 (Pilot, Navigator and EWO) Length: 75 ft 2 in (22.9 m) Wingspan: 72 ft 6 in (22.1 m) Height: 23 ft 7 in (7.2 m) Wing area: 780 ft² (72.5 m²) Empty weight: 42,540 lb (19,300 kg) Loaded weight: 57,800 lb (26,200 kg) Max. takeoff weight: 83,000 lb (38,000 kg) Powerplant: 2 × Allison J71-A-11 or -13 turbojets, 10,200 lbf (45 kN) each One of the guys in my first ops duty in Thailand had been in B-66 bomb-droppers in France earlier in his career. He wasn't an EWO. Makes me wonder if the crew make-up was pilot, nav-bomb, and EWO in the bombers. For sure there wouild have been an EWO in the EB's. I suspect that this post is bs of somekind. No FE in B-47 or B-52. "Unlike...the Destroyer was not used as a bomber in Vietnam..." according to Wikapedia.
  14. Any updates to the circumstances of this tragic mishap? Was the airplane equipped with a FDR and CVR? Recovered? I would expect that progress reports have been issued by the safety investigation board? "Used-to-be"...each wing operating herks would be on the distribution list. From what I can see of the videos...the takeoff and climb appeared to be an unusual combination of attitude and bank right away after takeoff. Nose high and a lot of right bank it looks like. Hard to tell from the distance and angle. I too can imagine a static #1 propeller in a few frames of one of the videos. I also can see what looks like a big yaw angle to the left developing and progressing to stalling that wing. I was initially thinking big-time prop malfunction, but I would have expected some kind of grounding of HamStandard props-equipped planes to have occurred already, if that were the case.
  • Create New...