VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 29 Aug 2018, 19:52
by blain
First pic I've seen of a VFA-147 F-35C. I'd like to see the CAG jet. From a modelers perspective I hope at some point it has as much color as USMC's F-35 squadron CO jets.

Image

https://news.usni.org/2018/08/27/f-35cs ... am-lincoln

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 29 Aug 2018, 20:34
by spazsinbad
F-35C NH 410 Deck ABE 27 Aug 2018
"An F-35C Lighting II Joint Strike Fighter maneuvers aboard USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN-72) on Monday during operations in the Atlantic on Aug. 27, 2018. USNI News Photo"
https://news.usni.org/wp-content/upload ... C_0700.jpg


I used to be able to log in to DVIDS to download high quality photos but not today - not with three browsers I cannot?
"180820-N-FK070-1182 ATLANTIC OCEAN (Aug. 20, 2018) Aviation Boatswain's Mate (Handling) 1st Class Caleb Swaim directs an F-35C Lightning II assigned to the Rough Raiders of Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 125 on the flight deck of the Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72). (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class Brian M. Wilbur/Released)" https://cdn.dvidshub.net/media/thumbs/p ... 0w_q95.jpg


Went to another photo in series and now I can log in - I dunno….
"180822-N-NF912-1031
ATLANTIC OCEAN (Aug. 22, 2018) Seaman Savannah Reid observes an F-35C Lightning II assigned to the Rough Raiders of Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 125 approach the Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72). (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist Seaman Jeremiah Bartelt/Released)" https://www.dvidshub.net/download/image/4685305 (JPG 1.1Mb)

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 31 Aug 2018, 03:13
by 35_aoa
Surprised to get back from 5 weeks at sea and not see a single thread about this.......last 2 weeks we just did F-35 "OT-1". First cyclic CVN F-35 ops in history. Yes, they howl a little more than our Rhinos (much like a Viper), and their formation lights are configured in a weird way so as to make them look like they have cat eyes on the PLAT cam. And yes, Top Gun 2 film crew was there as well, shooting all over the place. Maybe my 15 mins in fame is yet to come.....think I bagged a (settle)/AR OK 2 wire the sunset they were filming at the same time I was flying.

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 31 Aug 2018, 03:24
by popcorn
35_aoa wrote:Surprised to get back from 5 weeks at sea and not see a single thread about this.......last 2 weeks we just did F-35 "OT-1". First cyclic CVN F-35 ops in history. Yes, they howl a little more than our Rhinos (much like a Viper), and their formation lights are configured in a weird way so as to make them look like they have cat eyes on the PLAT cam. And yes, Top Gun 2 film crew was there as well, shooting all over the place. Maybe my 15 mins in fame is yet to come.....think I bagged a (settle)/AR OK 2 wire the sunset they were filming at the same time I was flying.

Cool! Trapping a Rhino during sunset, great imagery...

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 31 Aug 2018, 05:00
by spazsinbad
35_aoa wrote:Surprised to get back from 5 weeks at sea and not see a single thread about this.......last 2 weeks we just did F-35 "OT-1". First cyclic CVN F-35 ops in history. Yes, they howl a little more than our Rhinos (much like a Viper), and their formation lights are configured in a weird way so as to make them look like they have cat eyes on the PLAT cam. And yes, Top Gun 2 film crew was there as well, shooting all over the place. Maybe my 15 mins in fame is yet to come.....think I bagged a (settle)/AR OK 2 wire the sunset they were filming at the same time I was flying.

News started here: viewtopic.php?f=57&t=15767&p=400669&hilit=usni#p400669
and:
viewtopic.php?f=57&t=15767&p=400825&hilit=supadupas#p400825

USN has been on info lock down for many months now - before the USAF did same - however the USAF are supposed to come out of their self imposed media cloistering (for OPSEC training for spokespeeps so some can LURN HOW TO SPELL LIGHTNING FOR goodness sake!) soonish like.

THIS IS A GOOD ONE BUTT! viewtopic.php?f=62&t=16223&p=400742&hilit=Lincoln#p400742

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 31 Aug 2018, 05:17
by 35_aoa
From a basic launch and recovery perspective, it was basically a non event. They got aboard just fine. There are no new guys flying F-35C's right now, all are either Hornet or Rhino background cruise experienced pilots, if not career F/A-18 folks in some cases. That being said, their baseline landing mode is equivalent to F/A-18 PLM/"Path". They don't even have the option to fly the "manual" pass (no auto anything) that I grew up flying. In short, no color, I only saw one F-35 bolter in 2 weeks of flying......

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 31 Aug 2018, 05:43
by spazsinbad
Interesting to know. How 'bout your goodself? What mode do you usually use and what mode were you using for the settle?

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 31 Aug 2018, 05:44
by sprstdlyscottsmn
Awesome stuff! In my head any sunset 2-wire Rhino trap I see in the movie will be you!

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 31 Aug 2018, 06:25
by spazsinbad
DOAN SEDDLE: https://www.dvidshub.net/image/4667238/ ... -jx484-345
"ATLANTIC OCEAN (Aug. 21, 2018) An F/A-18 Super Hornet approaches the flight deck of the Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72). Abraham Lincoln is currently underway conducting carrier qualifications. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Mark Andrew Hays/Released) [JPG 1.2Mb] https://www.dvidshub.net/download/image/4667238 OR https://cdn.dvidshub.net/media/photos/1808/4667238.jpg

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 31 Aug 2018, 06:41
by 35_aoa
spazsinbad wrote:Interesting to know. How 'bout your goodself? What mode do you usually use and what mode were you using for the settle?


I was a "Path" guy myself, like most other cruise experienced folks. We got most of our FNG's there by the end of the det as well. It is a little bit different muscle memory (little power call is easily overdone for example) but it is as lazy as you can get during a night recovery..........it feels really uncomfortable to just let the ball sit there perfectly centered, but it actually works......though 5 wet tends to gob on a bunch of power at the ramp when the ship is making its own wind, i.e. burble. Click out of auto throttles and it is fixed. I was in the 5W on said sunset, I'm sure they will filter out the tanker recovery sadly :) But I got a little lazy at the ramp and settled. Think that was my only 2 wire, all the others were either 3 (mostly) or 4 on occasion if I got tall in close. Basically you just watch lineup and make a couple glideslope corrections if you begin at an on and on start. Super easy. Pretty much the entire airwing, save the E-2, was getting nothing but OK-3's, to the point where they had to strip the 3 a little more regularly than normal. We also were the first airwing to use the "extended landing pattern" during the day/case 1/2. Descend to 450 feet aft of the bow, same abeam distance (1.2-1.3), then turn from downwind at either 1.7 NM if own interval, or with interval at the 9:30 position if someone is ahead of you. Makes for about a mile straight away with lineup solved, just waiting to intercept GS from below, and if you are flying PLM Path or Rate, it is way easier to get to an on/on start than what we used to do with the traditional approach turn. More repeatable if you will. Makes breaking the deck timing a little more nebulous though.

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 31 Aug 2018, 07:13
by spazsinbad
I unnerstood most of your jargon :roll: FiveWet would be the TANKER I guess soon (by 2024 bloody hell) to be replaced by the BOING! MQ-25. So at 450 feet when you turn base do you stay level to pick up the ball round the last part of the turn?

I have often claimed to have done 400 feet carrier circuits which seemed easier when level turning base rather than NATOPS 600 feet descending base turn in an A4G - long ago. :shock: Shorter straightaways left less time for stuff ups. :mrgreen:

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 31 Aug 2018, 08:25
by 35_aoa
spazsinbad wrote:I unnerstood most of your jargon :roll: FiveWet would be the TANKER I guess soon (by 2024 bloody hell) to be replaced by the BOING! MQ-25. So at 450 feet when you turn base do you stay level to pick up the ball round the last part of the turn?

I have often claimed to have done 400 feet carrier circuits which seemed easier when level turning base rather than NATOPS 600 feet descending base turn in an A4G - long ago. :shock: Shorter straightaways left less time for stuff ups. :mrgreen:


5W or 3W or even 1W (yo-yo tanker ops) is an F/A-18 thing, but yes, definitely tanker stuff. Like you said, you stay level at 450, round the corner by about 2 miles astern, and have about a mile to get everything suitcased before you push over and intercept glideslope from below at 1.0-1.1 NM. It is a bit of a green machine, if your ready room has a greenie board.....I've never been in a squadron that has one, but that doesn't make it any better or worse.....though it has been a long time, or maybe never, since I have scared anyone on the platform

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 31 Aug 2018, 08:42
by spazsinbad
Heheh - Greenie Board - the walk of shame for sprogs! (nuggets/newbies) Intercepting from below is OK? Anyway our A4G squadron was copying the SEA VENOM of previous times. The Venom pilot view over the bulbous nose was not good. The Observer in the right hand seat called out the airspeed in one knot increments so that the pilot did not have to look inside. Tight curving circuits more or less ALL THE TIME from the break helped pilot view in the left turn. Short finals helped when there was NO LSO. This is aboard HMAS Melbourne from c. 1957 to 1966. These guys probably got away with a lot; so when the USN trained LSOs came along in the A4G era there were initially horrendous shouting matches from the olden ones. My CO even arrested an A4G when the mirror was covered up! Talk about deck spotting. 8) The MCO Mirror Control Officer sat behind the mirror while the LSO was caught out from the quick A4G return, discovering error after.

I found the new descending turn from 600 foot base difficult to master at first, we transitioned about halfway through the first cruise IIRC. Anyway as the most junior pilot on VF-805 I knew bugga all about deck landings (my 1st were in the A4G).

Perhaps different to your method with level approach to push over was we turned level but we could see the ball in our MELBOURNE MIRROR about halfway around the level turn, so we transitioned to flying the ball during the turn to finals. Can't recall how long the groove was then but it was short & sweet. Or so I thought until the LSO debrief. :twisted:

MIRRORS are curved so view angle wide & with only a 5.5 degree angle deck things could be as tight as, line up no probs.

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 31 Aug 2018, 15:07
by sprstdlyscottsmn
Did you happen to hear what (nick)name they were calling it around the boat? This is the first time we've had someone on the boards who could have first hand knowledge.

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 31 Aug 2018, 15:44
by steve2267
sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:Did you happen to hear what (nick)name they were calling it around the boat? This is the first time we've had someone on the boards who could have first hand knowledge.


I too am curious. Was it the Chair Force guys @ Nellis who started Panther? Dunno if the Nasal Aviators would go with that... although Panther would fit
35_aoa wrote:their formation lights are configured in a weird way so as to make them look like they have cat eyes on the PLAT cam

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 31 Aug 2018, 18:01
by krorvik
Couple of cool shots on Twitter a short while ago:

https://twitter.com/USNavy/status/1035558346135363585

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 31 Aug 2018, 18:54
by 35_aoa
sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:Did you happen to hear what (nick)name they were calling it around the boat?


"Lightning"

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 31 Aug 2018, 19:22
by sprstdlyscottsmn
35_aoa wrote:
sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:Did you happen to hear what (nick)name they were calling it around the boat?


"Lightning"

Hahaha, how anti-climactic.

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 01 Sep 2018, 00:10
by jetblast16


Like the burner pass at 1:48+ :roll:

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 01 Sep 2018, 01:23
by spazsinbad
Nice one. Link URL to video above for peeps like me who cannot see videos using IE11 in Win10 (EDGE & FireFox OK).

F-35C Lightning II Conducts Operational Test-1 Aboard USS Abraham Lincoln 30 Aug 2018 USN
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmP2NxeF2ss

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 04 Sep 2018, 17:43
by doge
:( I was very worried, but the pilot was safe and I was relieved. :salute:
At the same time, I was amazed at the robustness of the F-35C that landed even if the engine was damaged...!! :shock: (Extremely surprised...!!)
https://news.usni.org/2018/09/04/f-35c-damaged-36249
F-35C, Super Hornet Damaged During At-Sea Aerial Refueling
By: Ben Werner September 4, 2018 11:49 AM
An F-35C Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter flying from USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN-72) was damaged during an aerial refueling exercise, in the first major flight mishap for the carrier version of the JSF.

The engine of an F-35C from Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 125 was damaged while receiving fuel from an F/A-18F Super Hornet from VFA-103 on Aug. 22, Navy officials confirmed to USNI News. Debris from an aerial refueling basket was ingested into the F-35C’s engine intake, resulting in the damage, Naval Air Forces Atlantic spokesman Cmdr. Dave Hecht said on Tuesday.

Both fighters were able to land safely – the Super Hornet flew to Naval Air Station Oceana, Va., while the F-35C returned to Lincoln. No injuries were reported and the incident is currently under investigation, Hecht said.

Damage to the F-35C was reported as a Class A mishap – the most serious type for a military aircraft. An incident is classified as Class A when an aircraft suffers more than $2 million in damage, is totally destroyed or involves a serious or fatal injury to the aircrew. The damage to the F-35 was above the $2 million threshold, Hecht said. A new F135 engine for the JSF costs about $14 million, according to the most recent contract award to engine builder Pratt & Whitney.

The Super Hornet was also damaged but was reported as a Class C mishap because there were no injuries and the total estimated cost of damage to the aircraft is between $50,000 and $500,000, Hecht said.

The F-35 was flying in an integrated air wing test event aboard Lincoln that Navy officials described as a validation of how the aircraft operates and is maintained and sustained at sea. This first-ever at-sea operational test for the F-35C, launching and recovering alongside Super Hornets, E-2D Advanced Hawkeyes and C-2A Greyhounds, is a first glimpse of what the future air wing will look like once the F-35C reaches initial operational capability and is more widely fielded.

The test offered the Navy a way to gauge how well the F-35 “integrates with the ship, how it interoperates with communications, data links, other aircraft, and then how we conduct the mission and tie into the other aircraft that are conducting that mission and how effective they are when they do it,” Rear Adm. Dale Horan, director of Joint Strike Fighter Fleet Integration for the Navy, explained to reporters during a media event last week aboard Lincoln.

The F-35Cs operating on Lincoln were from VFA-125, a fleet replacement squadron, and VFA-147, an operational squadron. Both are based out of Naval Air Station Lemoore, Calif.

Navy expects to achieve initial operational capability (IOC) for the F-35C in February 2019. Before achieving IOC, though, the F-35C has to conduct a formal initial operational test and evaluation event at sea, which is expected to occur in the fall. The Navy will also have to show it can man, train, equip and operate 10 F-35Cs at sea, along with establishing an appropriate support network to supply parts and personnel, ahead of declaring IOC.

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 04 Sep 2018, 18:21
by spazsinbad
Seems to me that the F135 is a very robust engine when debris from the basket does not kill it. Must be reassuring at least for those wavering about single engine carrier aviation ops. Would be good to know more details about whys & wherefors.

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 04 Sep 2018, 19:32
by outlaw162
Debris from an aerial refueling basket was ingested into the F-35C’s engine intake, resulting in the damage


How do you get 'debris' from a basket? Those baskets are pretty robust also.

I've seen the whole basket broken off and come to rest at the base of the probe on an F-100 that occured due to excessive closure before contact, but it's hard to imagine where in the basket you get debris from....or how. :shock:

35aoa are you there? Is this the reason for the helmet display adjustment for the canopy bow obstruction mentioned in another thread I believe?

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 04 Sep 2018, 20:03
by sprstdlyscottsmn
Robust single engine ability to fly back to the boat after a class A mishap involving the engine.

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 04 Sep 2018, 20:22
by spazsinbad
outlaw162 wrote:
Debris from an aerial refueling basket was ingested into the F-35C’s engine intake, resulting in the damage


How do you get 'debris' from a basket? Those baskets are pretty robust also.

I've seen the whole basket broken off and come to rest at the base of the probe on an F-100 that occured due to excessive closure before contact, but it's hard to imagine where in the basket you get debris from....or how. :shock:

35aoa are you there? Is this the reason for the helmet display adjustment for the canopy bow obstruction mentioned in another thread I believe?

Not sure what you imagine a basket to look like. I'll post a PDF from here: http://api.ning.com/files/HmsNCuI4-iDeF ... wcopy2.pdf which is no longer available so I'll have to find it on my computer. Meanwhile there should be some info in this forum about the hose/drogue combo. The 2nd fixed camera in front of the pilot in combination with the HMDS camera (when images stitched together) takes away the canopy bow, especially problematic when night air refueling. The drogue/basket is really close to the canopy when hooked into the probe.

Perhaps this photo sufficiently represents the pilot view (but how would I or anyone here on this forum know?): https://a855196877272cb14560-2a4fa819a6 ... __main.jpg

The PDF is mentioned with pics in this thread (scroll up down): Constant fixes life of engineering
viewtopic.php?f=60&t=27109&p=287524&hilit=KneeboardWinter2013reviewcopy2#p287524

Aforementioned 2 page PDF now ATTACHED below....

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 04 Sep 2018, 20:33
by outlaw162
Not sure what you imagine a basket to look like.


Pretty much the same as what I saw about 3 feet away doing P&D refueling for 2000 hrs in the Hun. :D

Two more questions....

What's the USN philosophy about diverting to shore with an engine problem if possible as opposed to putting it on the boat? If the Hornet went to Oceana and the F135 engine appeared robust, why didn't the F-35C go to Oceana just in case?

Secondly, will this be in the movie?

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 04 Sep 2018, 20:34
by sferrin
outlaw162 wrote:
Debris from an aerial refueling basket was ingested into the F-35C’s engine intake, resulting in the damage


How do you get 'debris' from a basket? Those baskets are pretty robust also.

I've seen the whole basket broken off and come to rest at the base of the probe on an F-100 that occured due to excessive closure before contact, but it's hard to imagine where in the basket you get debris from....or how. :shock:

35aoa are you there? Is this the reason for the helmet display adjustment for the canopy bow obstruction mentioned in another thread I believe?


This drogue doesn't look particularly intact. Just sayin'.

Hornet-shattered.jpg

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 04 Sep 2018, 20:36
by spazsinbad
:devil: WOW - 2k hours of ARF - that HUN Shirley sucked gas?! :devil: You and I can imagine a lot of things - ritely or rongly. However I like to inform people with facts/pictures not just speculation - of which there is plenty on t'internet.
:shock: Yes I wondered why the F-35C arrested back on LINCOLN - but then again idle speculation is for the idle - no? :doh:

Notwithstanding my idleness I'll speculate the engine appeared to work well at the time with damage discovered later?

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 04 Sep 2018, 20:47
by outlaw162
This drogue doesn't look particularly intact. Just sayin'.


Neither does the canopy.

Navy needs a new drogue supplier.....or a probe behind the engine inlets.

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 04 Sep 2018, 20:58
by spazsinbad
Perhaps the outlaw is thinking of the IRON MAIDEN? Now THAT is a robust BASKET bygeebygollee. Of course the PDF is also no longer at this address (it is shy & retiring like me). http://www.public.navy.mil/navsafecen/D ... 012%20.pdf

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 04 Sep 2018, 23:35
by popcorn
If only it had a second engine, it would have made it back to the carrier
Oh wait... :devil:

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 04 Sep 2018, 23:58
by maus92
sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:Robust single engine ability to fly back to the boat after a class A mishap involving the engine.


Perhaps that was their only choice. No fuel, no beach for you.

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 05 Sep 2018, 00:01
by maus92
outlaw162 wrote:
Not sure what you imagine a basket to look like.


Pretty much the same as what I saw about 3 feet away doing P&D refueling for 2000 hrs in the Hun. :D

Two more questions....

What's the USN philosophy about diverting to shore with an engine problem if possible as opposed to putting it on the boat? If the Hornet went to Oceana and the F135 engine appeared robust, why didn't the F-35C go to Oceana just in case?

Secondly, will this be in the movie?


Fuel state, and/or they didn't want to risk running a FOD'd engine any longer than necessary. Would have been nice to have two.

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 05 Sep 2018, 00:15
by sferrin
maus92 wrote:
outlaw162 wrote:
Not sure what you imagine a basket to look like.


Pretty much the same as what I saw about 3 feet away doing P&D refueling for 2000 hrs in the Hun. :D

Two more questions....

What's the USN philosophy about diverting to shore with an engine problem if possible as opposed to putting it on the boat? If the Hornet went to Oceana and the F135 engine appeared robust, why didn't the F-35C go to Oceana just in case?

Secondly, will this be in the movie?


Fuel state, and/or they didn't want to risk running a FOD'd engine any longer than necessary. Would have been nice to have two.



Why would you purposely run a FODed engine longer than necessary if you didn't have to? :roll: :doh:

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 05 Sep 2018, 01:07
by spazsinbad
As I said earlier - perhaps the F-35C engine was not seen as damaged until maintenance looked at it on the carrier deck.

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 05 Sep 2018, 01:28
by spazsinbad
maus92 wrote:
outlaw162 wrote:
Not sure what you imagine a basket to look like.


Pretty much the same as what I saw about 3 feet away doing P&D refueling for 2000 hrs in the Hun. :D

Two more questions....

What's the USN philosophy about diverting to shore with an engine problem if possible as opposed to putting it on the boat? If the Hornet went to Oceana and the F135 engine appeared robust, why didn't the F-35C go to Oceana just in case?

Secondly, will this be in the movie?


Fuel state, and/or they didn't want to risk running a FOD'd engine any longer than necessary. Would have been nice to have two.

Sadly March 2018 these dead F/18-F aircrew had two engines: viewtopic.php?f=47&t=53963
OR
Oz Growled Dun Growled:
"...The investigation has confirmed a high-pressure compressor in the Growler's engine had broken into three major pieces, with one segment piercing through the bottom of the jet and taking a chunk out of the runway. Another piece of the compressor went sideways through the second engine causing severe damage, while the third piece went up and destroyed the right-hand tailfin before flying away..." viewtopic.php?f=58&t=23043&p=400026&hilit=destroyed#p400026

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 05 Sep 2018, 02:45
by Corsair1963
spazsinbad wrote:Seems to me that the F135 is a very robust engine when debris from the basket does not kill it. Must be reassuring at least for those wavering about single engine carrier aviation ops. Would be good to know more details about whys & wherefors.



They call it "graceful degradation" meaning it can take considerable battle damage and continue to operate.....The P&W J-57 in the F-8 Crusader had a very good reputation in that regard.

8)

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 05 Sep 2018, 02:56
by marauder2048
spazsinbad wrote:Must be reassuring at least for those wavering about single engine carrier aviation ops.


Well the Navy did just predicate most of the long range utility of the CVW on a single engine refueling concept.

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 05 Sep 2018, 03:24
by spazsinbad
It is just amazing to me. I have 1600 hours in single engine jets of old with some carrier aviation time in the good ole A4G. Sure when the engine or the engine shroud failed that was it - then an ESCAPAC let down - which I have not done myself.

Carrier aviation has a long memory with perhaps the current USN not quite feeling it because of circumstances. The SKYHAWK introduced BUDDY TANKING in the 1950s. Hose & Drogue has been in the USN since then. They know all about it and have planned for it in every which way but loose. We do not know the circumstances of current mishap however already there are calls for all kinds of stuff that really is not required. Military aviation is dangerous, Carrier aviation is slightly different if I may say so. There will be plans for all kinds of air refueling scenarios, both around the carrier and during missions far afield. I'm impressed - for whatever reason the F135 gobbled some drogue bits and returned safely.

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 05 Sep 2018, 10:13
by krieger22
Throwing it out on Reddit hooked an interesting, if irate, comment chain: https://reddit.com/r/F35Lightning/comme ... ap/e5euhg4

I'll try poking around for more details.

It's quite unusual that they had enough confidence in it to have it land on the carrier too - I wonder if the barricade was prepped in case.

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 05 Sep 2018, 13:07
by sferrin
krieger22 wrote:It's quite unusual that they had enough confidence in it to have it land on the carrier too


Why?

krieger22 wrote: I wonder if the barricade was prepped in case.


They probably did the same thing they would for any other aircraft that had just swallowed FOD.

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 05 Sep 2018, 16:22
by mk82
That F135.....what a tough engine!!

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 05 Sep 2018, 16:35
by steve2267
krieger22 wrote:Throwing it out on Reddit hooked an interesting, if irate, comment chain: https://reddit.com/r/F35Lightning/comme ... ap/e5euhg4

I'll try poking around for more details.

It's quite unusual that they had enough confidence in it to have it land on the carrier too - I wonder if the barricade was prepped in case.


In that reddit, one bogey-spades states

bogey-spades wrote:Nevermind that the jet proved it couldn't safely operate in modern carrier cyclic ops.


I am interested as to what 35_aoa has to say about the above statement regarding the F-35 not being able to safely operate in modern carrier cyclic ops. I don't have any context with which to evaluate bogey-spade's reddit comments. He states that he was flying, but does not state what he was flying, or flying in, and neither does he state that he (she?) is a pilot. IMO he (or she?) writes in a manner that would seem to lead the reader to assume that he is a Navair fast jet pilot. But for whatever reason, he is not a big fan of the F-35. (Maybe he owns a LOT of Boing stock? Dunno.)

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 05 Sep 2018, 18:37
by outlaw162
As I said earlier - perhaps the F-35C engine was not seen as damaged until maintenance looked at it on the carrier deck.


from wiki:

The F135's health management system is designed to provide real time data to maintainers on the ground. This allows them to troubleshoot problems and prepare replacement parts before the aircraft returns to base.


I assume the 'ground' also includes the boat. This engine 'data-link' may be the reason they put it back on the boat....or shouldn't have.

One would think Class A damage would show up in the data somewhere....if not, the real time heath mgmt system would seem to be somewhat less than useful as intended.

Where is 35aoa when you need him? Maybe he was driving the tanker. :shock:

(BTW that pic of the F-18 with the shredded basket and the shattered canopy looks like something more catastrophic happened than 'basket debris'.....maybe a basket skip hit off the canopy....)

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 05 Sep 2018, 19:49
by marauder2048
Actually the incident was already accounted for in the Navy's mishaps figures.

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 05 Sep 2018, 20:04
by spazsinbad
outlaw162 wrote:
As I said earlier - perhaps the F-35C engine was not seen as damaged until maintenance looked at it on the carrier deck.

from wiki:
The F135's health management system is designed to provide real time data to maintainers on the ground. This allows them to troubleshoot problems and prepare replacement parts before the aircraft returns to base.


I assume the 'ground' also includes the boat. This engine 'data-link' may be the reason they put it back on the boat....or shouldn't have.

One would think Class A damage would show up in the data somewhere....if not, the real time heath mgmt system would seem to be somewhat less than useful as intended.

Where is 35aoa when you need him? Maybe he was driving the tanker. :shock:

(BTW that pic of the F-18 with the shredded basket and the shattered canopy looks like something more catastrophic happened than 'basket debris'.....maybe a basket skip hit off the canopy....)

IIRC that datalink from aircraft to ground is not working at moment; but once on the ground data is transferred.

The shattered canopy and basket on the end of the probe story was recounted in APPROACH or NAN magazine and is available on the internet in a few places such as TAILHOOK and was recounted in this forum somewhere.....

Searching for it found this old IRON MAIDEN USN story: viewtopic.php?f=55&t=20468&p=300279&hilit=Hornet+canopy#p300279

The BASKET CASE story:
Another Oldie But a Goodie... Don't fight the Drogue and Hose!
19 Aug 2008 Tailhook Assoc

"Well told by a Bug Driver back some 6 or so years ago! (I do not know the author here... anyone want to pony up?) Happened in VFA-147...."

Source: http://tailhookdaily.typepad.com/tailho ... die-b.html

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 05 Sep 2018, 20:34
by outlaw162
Interesting stuff, thanks.

Navy F/A-18 Hornet tanking from Air Force KC-10's and KC-135's (the KC-135 is particularly challenging-- pilots call it the "Iron Maiden"). In turbulent weather, especially at night, tanking can be even tougher than landing on the ship.


I would guess the Navy wasn't overly happy with the KC-97 either back when.... :D

This seems to be a VFA-147 thing....

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 05 Sep 2018, 20:38
by spazsinbad
The IRON MAIDEN is NOTORIOUS in Naval Aviation circles from what I have read online and in e-mails to me about same. As one may imagine I have a tonne of material about ARF so I'll crunch it down to 11Mb PDF to post here soonish like.....
Why Navy Pilots Hate The KC-135
25 Aug 2015 'GM'

"Depending on who you ask, the response to uttering the words “Iron Maiden” bring about very different emotions. Ask any fan of rock music and chances are the reaction is the sign of the horns. Ask any Naval Aviator, however, and the response is almost certainly dread....

...“Basket slaps” on the aircraft are not uncommon; it is hard to dance with the Maiden and not get roughed up. While I love the Hornet, there’s some questionable design philosophy when it comes to tanking. The probe is on the right side of the nose. Also, on the right side is an AOA (Angle Of Attack) probe. There are two hydraulic systems on the aircraft and each are run off of its respective motor. All of the hydraulic services besides flight controls (landing gear extension, brakes, anti-skid, etcetera) run off the right motor. Murphy’s law says you will have a basket slap on the right side and the AOA probe will be forcibly removed. Where would it go? You guessed it: straight down the right engine intake!

Now you are looking at a potential single-engine scenario with degraded AOA information going to your air data computer and flight control computers. Not the kind of airplane you want to bring back to das boat.

The only silver lining is that the KC-135 has the highest flow compared to any other tanker. Still, on a combat sortie where up to 40 minutes can be spent plugged into her basket, she’s definitely earned her nick-name of “Iron Maiden”."

Source: http://fightersweep.com/2881/why-navy-p ... he-kc-135/

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 05 Sep 2018, 20:40
by SpudmanWP
"The boat wants to know how badly the canopy is cracked."

I couldn't believe that one... I thought he would have heard all the wind in the cockpit and known. "It's not cracked, it's gone. I'm flying a convertible."

Best line.. Except for this

From my knees down I was toasty and warm. "This little piggy" was getting sweaty in fact.


after landing

The maintainers showed up about four hours after I did. After the appropriate amount of gawking they got to work and fixed it well enough for the RTB in under four hours.

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 05 Sep 2018, 21:02
by outlaw162
"Depending on who you ask, the response to uttering the words “Iron Maiden” bring about very different emotions. Ask any fan of rock music and chances are the reaction is the sign of the horns. Ask any Naval Aviator, however, and the response is almost certainly dread....


Just another day/night at the office for a Hun driver.... 8)

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 05 Sep 2018, 21:22
by spazsinbad
outlaw162 wrote:
"Depending on who you ask, the response to uttering the words “Iron Maiden” bring about very different emotions. Ask any fan of rock music and chances are the reaction is the sign of the horns. Ask any Naval Aviator, however, and the response is almost certainly dread....


Just another day/night at the office for a Hun driver.... 8)

You may gather from the NavAv ARF material PDF attached that things are a bit different in that sphere. I cannot speak from my own 'maiden' experience except to add that my first (T)A4G ARF sortie had me scrubbed temporarily (only whilst in the air with my instructor in back of the TA4G telling me how incompetent I was). I had missed the general ARF brief earlier for an indestructible good reason so not knowing the 'gouge' about putting my right boot into the basket for good result. This 'excuse' became known on the ground so taken up again that day I NAILED IT & so continued on me merry way.

Turbulent Tanking (same video in the box below)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-RcBAZ5bx4

The URL links are dead along with any other links in this PDF because it has been PRN reprinted to reduce file size....



ARF RNZAF A-4K Newbie to Air ReFuelling (straight probes)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0SE2DkEe7Uo


Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 05 Sep 2018, 22:23
by krieger22
steve2267 wrote:
krieger22 wrote:Throwing it out on Reddit hooked an interesting, if irate, comment chain: https://reddit.com/r/F35Lightning/comme ... ap/e5euhg4

I'll try poking around for more details.

It's quite unusual that they had enough confidence in it to have it land on the carrier too - I wonder if the barricade was prepped in case.


In that reddit, one bogey-spades states

bogey-spades wrote:Nevermind that the jet proved it couldn't safely operate in modern carrier cyclic ops.


I am interested as to what 35_aoa has to say about the above statement regarding the F-35 not being able to safely operate in modern carrier cyclic ops. I don't have any context with which to evaluate bogey-spade's reddit comments. He states that he was flying, but does not state what he was flying, or flying in, and neither does he state that he (she?) is a pilot. IMO he (or she?) writes in a manner that would seem to lead the reader to assume that he is a Navair fast jet pilot. But for whatever reason, he is not a big fan of the F-35. (Maybe he owns a LOT of Boing stock? Dunno.)


Skimming his profile suggests he's a Rhino pilot. Looks like they're already getting territorial from the looks of things. He hasn't answered me yet.

(In before it turns out he got screwed out of a refueling due to the incident)

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 05 Sep 2018, 23:21
by spazsinbad
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... 071%29.JPG (3.1Mb)
"U.S. Navy Lt. William Bowen, left, an F-35 Pax River Integrated Test Force pilot assigned to Air Test and Evaluation Squadron 23 (VX-23), conducts an advanced aerial refueling control law test in an Lockheed Martin F-35C Lightning II with a Boeing F/A-18F Super Hornet (BuNo 165801) over the Atlantic Ocean on 26 June 2018." https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File ... -ZB537-071).JPG

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 06 Sep 2018, 01:33
by 35_aoa
krieger22 wrote:
I am interested as to what 35_aoa has to say about the above statement regarding the F-35 not being able to safely operate in modern carrier cyclic ops. I don't have any context with which to evaluate bogey-spade's reddit comments. He states that he was flying, but does not state what he was flying, or flying in, and neither does he state that he (she?) is a pilot. IMO he (or she?) writes in a manner that would seem to lead the reader to assume that he is a Navair fast jet pilot. But for whatever reason, he is not a big fan of the F-35. (Maybe he owns a LOT of Boing stock? Dunno.)


Skimming his profile suggests he's a Rhino pilot. Looks like they're already getting territorial from the looks of things. He hasn't answered me yet.

(In before it turns out he got screwed out of a refueling due to the incident)[/quote]

I wouldn't blow this event out of proportions. Stuff like this happens, even to operational aircraft. Some of the most dire emergencies (this one not being anywhere close to that category) I have seen have been while flying around the boat. That's just a fact of life......it is a very unforgiving place. I have no doubt that the F-35 will safely operate during cyclic ops in the future. They launched and recovered just fine. I can't comment about the specifics of this event, since the investigation is privileged and ongoing, but it doesn't somehow make me doubt the suitability of the F-35 to the fleet.

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 06 Sep 2018, 10:27
by mk82
steve2267 wrote:
krieger22 wrote:Throwing it out on Reddit hooked an interesting, if irate, comment chain: https://reddit.com/r/F35Lightning/comme ... ap/e5euhg4

I'll try poking around for more details.

It's quite unusual that they had enough confidence in it to have it land on the carrier too - I wonder if the barricade was prepped in case.


In that reddit, one bogey-spades states

bogey-spades wrote:Nevermind that the jet proved it couldn't safely operate in modern carrier cyclic ops.


I am interested as to what 35_aoa has to say about the above statement regarding the F-35 not being able to safely operate in modern carrier cyclic ops. I don't have any context with which to evaluate bogey-spade's reddit comments. He states that he was flying, but does not state what he was flying, or flying in, and neither does he state that he (she?) is a pilot. IMO he (or she?) writes in a manner that would seem to lead the reader to assume that he is a Navair fast jet pilot. But for whatever reason, he is not a big fan of the F-35. (Maybe he owns a LOT of Boing stock? Dunno.)


Nah, Bogey-spades is just a Luddite LOL! As 35_AOA noted, operational aircraft including Rhinos had nasty accidents/mishaps too in the real world.

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 06 Sep 2018, 10:56
by Dragon029
According to Bogey it wasn't a probe snapping - assuming he knows what happened that kinda narrows it down to a failure to disconnect or perhaps the basket getting snagged on some other part of the probe.

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 06 Sep 2018, 15:51
by markithere
Dragon029 wrote:According to Bogey it wasn't a probe snapping - assuming he knows what happened that kinda narrows it down to a failure to disconnect or perhaps the basket getting snagged on some other part of the probe.



So it was an alien encounter, a probing event? :D :doh:

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 06 Sep 2018, 15:57
by ricnunes
markithere wrote:
Dragon029 wrote:According to Bogey it wasn't a probe snapping - assuming he knows what happened that kinda narrows it down to a failure to disconnect or perhaps the basket getting snagged on some other part of the probe.



So it was an alien encounter, a probing event? :D :doh:


LOL :mrgreen:

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 06 Sep 2018, 17:41
by sferrin
Dragon029 wrote:According to Bogey it wasn't a probe snapping - assuming he knows what happened that kinda narrows it down to a failure to disconnect or perhaps the basket getting snagged on some other part of the probe.


Given this is the same guy that said the following, "Nevermind that the jet proved it couldn't safely operate in modern carrier cyclic ops.", based on a trashed basket (that has happened with every type of USN aircraft) I have to question his credibility.

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 06 Sep 2018, 19:21
by spazsinbad
Navy's F-35C Suffers 1st Major Mishap, Costing Millions in Damages
06 Sep 2018 Gina Harkins

"...The F-35C was receiving fuel from an F/A-18F Super Hornet off the coast of Virginia on Aug. 23 when debris from an aerial-refueling basket was ingested into the Joint Strike Fighter jet's engine intake, said Lt. Travis Callaghan, a spokesman for Naval Air Forces.

The mishap led to engine damage for the F-35C, assigned to the California-based "Rough Riders" with Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 125. While rare, Callahan said parts of refueling baskets being sucked into an engine's intake are the most common form of non-bird foreign object or debris strikes in the Navy's tactical aviation fleet...."

Source: https://www.military.com/defensetech/20 ... mages.html

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 06 Sep 2018, 20:33
by ricnunes
spazsinbad wrote:

"...The F-35C was receiving fuel from an F/A-18F Super Hornet off the coast of Virginia on Aug. 23 when debris from an aerial-refueling basket was ingested into the Joint Strike Fighter jet's engine intake, said Lt. Travis Callaghan, a spokesman for Naval Air Forces.

The mishap led to engine damage for the F-35C, assigned to the California-based "Rough Riders" with Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 125. While rare, Callahan said parts of refueling baskets being sucked into an engine's intake are the most common form of non-bird foreign object or debris strikes in the Navy's tactical aviation fleet...."

Source: https://www.military.com/defensetech/20 ... mages.html



That pretty much nails it and at the same time pretty much nails "Bogey-spades" credibility as well...

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 06 Sep 2018, 21:15
by botsing
sferrin wrote:Given this is the same guy that said the following, "Nevermind that the jet proved it couldn't safely operate in modern carrier cyclic ops.", based on a trashed basket (that has happened with every type of USN aircraft) I have to question his credibility.

ricnunes wrote:That pretty much nails it and at the same time pretty much nails "Bogey-spades" credibility as well...

I agree with both of you. I find it hard to believe that a current U.S. Navy pilot has such a polarized view on this matter.

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 06 Sep 2018, 22:48
by lbk000
I can believe it, they're just human. One of my friends is an enlisted in the navy and he tells me all sorts of hogwash like how the F-14 is somehow still secretly in service (according to him "nobody cares enough" to have caught on) and that LM is lying through their teeth on F-35 operational radius... :D

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 07 Sep 2018, 15:27
by spazsinbad
Interesting comment on USN F-35C stealth maintainability - damning with faint praise no doubt some will opine - oh well.
F-35C Joins Integrated Carrier Ops; Refueling Mishap: Videos Etc.
06 Sep 2018 Colin Clark

"ABOARD THE USS ABRAHAM LINCOLN: The Navy dragged its feet for years after committing to buy the F-35C for carrier operations. They worried it would be too expensive to maintain. They worried the tailhook problems would persist. They worried it was too heavy. Let’s face it: the Navy leadership was just worried. After all, they had a fighter that works, the Super Hornet, already flying, thoroughly integrated into the complex and dangerous dance of the carrier air wing. Some were nearing the end of their operational life but the Navy committed to strengthening their wings and keeping them flying....

...the man in charge off integrating the F-35C into the Navy, Rear Adm. Dale Horan, did tell me that the Navy has been pleasantly surprised by their ability to maintain the Joint Strike Fighter’s stealth characteristics. While such maintenance remains complex, he told me, it’s very manageable and less onerous than some had feared...."

Source: https://breakingdefense.com/2018/09/f-3 ... ideos-etc/

F-35C First Integrated Carrier Ops Aboard USS Lincoln [Just catapults of Shornets & SeaJets]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doGhDqImLcI


Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 07 Sep 2018, 15:45
by hythelday
I was surprised, multiple times, about how little knowledge people who work in relevant field can have about the matters they should be knowledgable about. E.g. I have once been told by a legit T-72 commander that "T-80 tank has rifled barrel".

That guy might be a SH driver, know his jet inside out, and be a superb naval aviator - but his knowledge of F-35 might be limited to Mujamdar and Rogoway.

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 07 Sep 2018, 16:13
by popcorn
At some juncture he will go up against a F-35 in training and I dare say it will be an epiphany for him as it has been for every 4gen pilot before him. If he's lucky, he'll manage to switch to a F-35C squadron.

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 07 Sep 2018, 20:22
by botsing
spazsinbad wrote:F-35C First Integrated Carrier Ops Aboard USS Lincoln [Just catapults of Shornets & SeaJets]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doGhDqImLcI

Nice video!

If there were any issues with the F-35C and carrier cyclic ops then this video doesn't show it (of course we only see the launch part).

I also noticed that the "launch bounce" of the F-35C didn't look any more severe than both Hornet's launch bounces, it actually looked less.

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 07 Sep 2018, 21:39
by ricnunes
popcorn wrote:At some juncture he will go up against a F-35 in training and I dare say it will be an epiphany for him as it has been for every 4gen pilot before him. If he's lucky, he'll manage to switch to a F-35C squadron.


That assuming he's the "real deal" which honestly I have my doubts (but hey, I could be wrong thou).

In case he's the real deal I can only smile imagining the scene where he for the first time (or second, or third, or...) will have to perform a "mock combat" with his Super Hornet against the F-35C.
Really, I used to be a Hornet/Super Hornet fan and to be honest I still am but hey trying to claim that the Super Hornet is superior to the F-35C makes me wonder how this guy (again if he's the real deal) managed to become a US Navy pilot...

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 07 Sep 2018, 21:51
by jetnerd
Like to see that the 35s can launch without AB. I wonder how useful a load they can bring aloft without it. AA loadout only? Or more?

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 07 Sep 2018, 22:19
by spazsinbad
jetnerd wrote:Like to see that the 35s can launch without AB. I wonder how useful a load they can bring aloft without it. AA loadout only? Or more?

:devil: You are a funny guy indeed. Would you like fries with that probably classified info? 8) The VX-23 F-35C test pilots will have produced a launch bulletin for CVN / aircrew / deckcrew use. You could aks for it I guess. Good luck. :roll: 8) :mrgreen:

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 07 Sep 2018, 22:27
by jetnerd
spazsinbad wrote:
jetnerd wrote:Like to see that the 35s can launch without AB. I wonder how useful a load they can bring aloft without it. AA loadout only? Or more?

:devil: You are a funny guy indeed. Would you like fries with that probably classified info? 8) The VX-23 F-35C test pilots will have produced a launch bulletin for CVN / aircrew / deckcrew use. You could aks for it I guess. Good luck. :roll: 8) :mrgreen:


I was speculating and of course don't want any answers that are classified. I LOVE that the internal weapons / typical stealthy config means that potential enemies have a hard time guessing what the 35 and 22's are up to even if they can directly observe them taking off/landing. I just remember how much everyone crowed publicly about how the F-14B / D's with the GE engines could take off without AB so it was nice to see it on the 35, although of course you can see none of the SH's are using it either in this video.

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 07 Sep 2018, 22:41
by spazsinbad
jetnerd wrote:
spazsinbad wrote:
jetnerd wrote:Like to see that the 35s can launch without AB. I wonder how useful a load they can bring aloft without it. AA loadout only? Or more?

:devil: You are a funny guy indeed. Would you like fries with that probably classified info? 8) The VX-23 F-35C test pilots will have produced a launch bulletin for CVN / aircrew / deckcrew use. You could aks for it I guess. Good luck. :roll: 8) :mrgreen:


I was speculating and of course don't want any answers that are classified. I LOVE that the internal weapons / typical stealthy config means that potential enemies have a hard time guessing what the 35 and 22's are up to even if they can directly observe them taking off/landing.

:roll: I agree 'not knowing' what is INSIDE is a worry for some. Assume the worst weapon scenario at all times. :drool:

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 07 Sep 2018, 22:49
by jetnerd
I just wish / hope that our stealth jets had "rectractable" Luneberg lenses so that when the jets are taking off or landing (i.e. publicly within multiple ground observers' range or those dastardly Soviet or Chinese trawlers following our CBGs) that no one with equipment could get a cheap read of their radar signature. The F-35 / F-22 pilots could launch with them deployed then once out of most peoples' visual range, retract or eject them, then depart along their actual mission vector. (or maybe they do that already, I don't wanna know :D )

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 01 Oct 2018, 15:25
by mrbuno
35_aoa wrote:Surprised to get back from 5 weeks at sea and not see a single thread about this.......last 2 weeks we just did F-35 "OT-1". First cyclic CVN F-35 ops in history. Yes, they howl a little more than our Rhinos (much like a Viper), and their formation lights are configured in a weird way so as to make them look like they have cat eyes on the PLAT cam. And yes, Top Gun 2 film crew was there as well, shooting all over the place. Maybe my 15 mins in fame is yet to come.....think I bagged a (settle)/AR OK 2 wire the sunset they were filming at the same time I was flying.


How many F-35C were on the ship? Does anybody know their BuNos? Especially of the one that got damaged.

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 01 Oct 2018, 19:58
by ricnunes
jetnerd wrote:I just wish / hope that our stealth jets had "rectractable" Luneberg lenses so that when the jets are taking off or landing (i.e. publicly within multiple ground observers' range or those dastardly Soviet or Chinese trawlers following our CBGs) that no one with equipment could get a cheap read of their radar signature. The F-35 / F-22 pilots could launch with them deployed then once out of most peoples' visual range, retract or eject them, then depart along their actual mission vector. (or maybe they do that already, I don't wanna know :D )


Well the F-35 already have something very similar to that. It's called "open the weapons bay doors". :mrgreen:

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 03 Oct 2018, 05:00
by 35_aoa
I wouldn't read too much into the non-afterburning cat shots in the F-35. Same is true for the Super Hornet, aside from being very heavily loaded (think a 10xGBU-32 scenario), and/or more commonly, "5 Wet" tanker configuration. For most typical launches, to include combat, MIL power is all you need. Different story for the legacy, though it was rarely "required", just a common habit/practice for most of us that flew it. Nothing classified about that, doubt it is for the F-35 either. I have no idea what BuNos were out there......not exactly something I spent my time taking a note of. It was a combination of VFA-101, VFA-125 and I *think* VFA-147 jets. There were 1XX and 4XX series sides/MODEX from what I recall.

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 03 Oct 2018, 11:04
by mrbuno
35_aoa wrote:... I have no idea what BuNos were out there......not exactly something I spent my time taking a note of. It was a combination of VFA-101, VFA-125 and I *think* VFA-147 jets. There were 1XX and 4XX series sides/MODEX from what I recall.

Thanks 35_aoa. From pictures and videos the following MODEX were readible (total 7 F-35C).
VFA-101: NJ-101, 169162/NJ-123, NJ-127
VFA-125: NJ-412
VFA-147: NH-403, NH-404, NH-410

Now some sources (http://www.uscarriers.net/cvn72history.htm) say only 6 a/c embarked on August 20. Is it possible the a/c involved in the mishap was replaced? NJ-101 was not seen on the pictures after the date of the mishap (August 22). And NJ-412 was only in pictures from August 23 onward. This is just speculation, but perhaps NJ-101 was the one that got damaged and got replaced by NJ-412.

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 04 Oct 2018, 06:51
by spazsinbad
Have Bin Sent E-mail Pics BuNo 169305 get tail waxed 407 ....

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 11 Oct 2018, 21:38
by spazsinbad
F-35s Temporarily Grounded After First Crash; First Fleet F-35C Delivered
11 Oct 2018 David Donald

"...the U.S. Navy’s first front-line squadron to operate the F-35C carrierborne version has received its first aircraft at Naval Air Station Lemoore. VFA-147 “Argonauts” has been using the aircraft of the training unit, VFA-125, while it prepares for fleet service, including participation in pre-IOT&E testing in August. Now the squadron can apply its badge to the first of its allocated aircraft, which are scheduled to undertake a first operational deployment aboard USS Carl Vinson in 2021. The squadron’s use of the name “Argonauts” was approved in 1967 when it was established as the Navy’s first A-7 Corsair II unit. The squadron typically uses the callsign “Jason.”" [HOW appropriate is that - OH THE HORROR! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jason_Voorhees ] {Yes I know 'Jason & the Argonauts'}

Source: https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news ... -delivered

HMDS for JASON: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... onmask.jpg

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 22 Oct 2018, 21:30
by spazsinbad
spazsinbad wrote:
35_aoa wrote:Surprised to get back from 5 weeks at sea and not see a single thread about this.......last 2 weeks we just did F-35 "OT-1". First cyclic CVN F-35 ops in history. Yes, they howl a little more than our Rhinos (much like a Viper), and their formation lights are configured in a weird way so as to make them look like they have cat eyes on the PLAT cam. And yes, Top Gun 2 film crew was there as well, shooting all over the place. Maybe my 15 mins in fame is yet to come.....think I bagged a (settle)/AR OK 2 wire the sunset they were filming at the same time I was flying.

News started here: viewtopic.php?f=57&t=15767&p=400669&hilit=usni#p400669
and:
viewtopic.php?f=57&t=15767&p=400825&hilit=supadupas#p400825

USN has been on info lock down for many months now - before the USAF did same - however the USAF are supposed to come out of their self imposed media cloistering (for OPSEC training for spokespeeps so some can LURN HOW TO SPELL LIGHTNING FOR goodness sake!) soonish like....

Firstly for the sake of STEVEN below above post - it is NASAL RADIATORS - a lot more funniER :doh: Meanwhile USN OPSEC.

https://news.usni.org/wp-content/upload ... .58-PM.png

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 28 Oct 2018, 01:14
by spazsinbad
Saw this info today about the COBHAM refueling pods on Oz MRTT KC-30As:
33 Squadron, Topping Up in the Top End!
22 Aug 2018 Phil Munsel

"...Pods – The RAAF’s, KC-30A aircraft are fitted with a pair of all-electric Cobham 905E under-wing refuelling pods with a 90ft hose-and-drogue system to refuel probe-equipped aircraft. The refuelling pods feature integral fuel boost pump which provides a fuel transfer capability up 1703 l/min at 45 to 55 psi. Pods operate with aircraft power, or are self-powered by a Ram Air Turbine (RAT). The drogue (The ‘Basket’ at the end) which is the part of the aerial refuelling system, stabilises the hose in flight and provides a funnel to aid insertion of the receiver aircraft probe into the hose. The RAAF have employed a high speed Variable Drag Drogue (VDD) with unique technology allowing for a stable platform for refuelling of 180-325 knots and a patented ‘low Foreign Object Damage’ construction which eliminates any parts that would cause receiver engine damage in case of breakage. The high speed VDD enables a single tanker to support a variety of aircraft from the Boeing V-22 Osprey to the latest generation fast jets such as the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter...." [prolly the USN don't have this NOW but may well ONE DAY?]

Photo: "Cobham 905E under-wing refuelling pods with a 90ft hose-and-drogue system" http://aviationspottersonline.com/wp-co ... 8-1122.jpg


Source: http://aviationspottersonline.com/33-sq ... e-top-end/

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 28 Oct 2018, 01:53
by ricnunes
spazsinbad wrote:Image


Why is someone who resembles Darth Vader on the that poster above? :mrgreen:

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 06 Nov 2018, 05:55
by spazsinbad
Lemoore jet fighter squadron is first in Navy to pass this milestone for the F-35C
23 Oct 2018 Lewis Griswold

"A squadron at Lemoore Naval Air Station has a Navy first to brag about. The Navy’s first operational F-35C squadron, VFA-147 based in Lemoore, has achieved “interim safe-for-flight operations certification,” an announcement Tuesday said. “This is a first for the U.S. Navy’s F-35C program,” said Lt. Cmdr. Lydia E. Bock.

It appears that only two final steps remain for the squadron to be officially ready for combat missions.

The certification achieved last week means the squadron can operate as an independent squadron that is no longer tied to the training squadron at Lemoore for F-35Cs.

Next, the VFA-147 “Argonauts” will achieve full safe-for-flight operations certification once it completes its aircraft carrier qualifications. That’s expected by the end of this year.

Early next year, the squadron is expected to achieve “Initial Operating Capability,” meaning it can be assigned to combat missions...."

Source: https://www.fresnobee.com/news/local/ar ... 12455.html

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 07 Nov 2018, 23:04
by juretrn

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 08 Nov 2018, 15:57
by ricnunes


WoW. Let me guess, that's Maverick's tower flyby for TopGun 2 :mrgreen:

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 08 Nov 2018, 18:41
by steve2267
The F-35C flyby in the above video begins @ 10:43 for anyone wanting to watch it on utoob.

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 09 Nov 2018, 05:46
by spazsinbad
Looked everywhere but not enough to find the original clip (I think that commercial movie about the F-35C & CVNs) but did not find so anyway have made a clip from the original long video above to see the F-35C flyby at 1 min 10 seconds in.

Hornet Carrier Ops 2018 West Coast Strike Fighter Ball JOPA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2Ficcg2FTU


Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 09 Nov 2018, 05:56
by 35_aoa


Pretty sure I was sitting in a jet when this happened.....I remember a flyby in burner during a similar time of the evening one night that startled the crap out of me as I was starting up my aircraft. Well done either way!

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 09 Nov 2018, 14:21
by sprstdlyscottsmn
Any chance you were in any of those shots?

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 22 Nov 2018, 06:01
by spazsinbad
Via E-mail: VFA-147 F-35C Lightning IIs over NAS Lemoore... THEN there is this one:
"Two F-35C Lightning II, attached to the #Argonauts of VFA-147, stationed at Naval Air Station Lemoore, fly in formation November 16, 2018" https://scontent.fsyd7-1.fna.fbcdn.net/ ... e=5C6BA589

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 22 Nov 2018, 20:21
by sprstdlyscottsmn
That's a wallpaper now

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 11 Dec 2018, 00:59
by spazsinbad
VFA-147 back at sea for CQ USS Carl Vinson 08 Dec 2018 pics via e-mail.

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 11 Dec 2018, 10:00
by Corsair1963
With VFA-101 shutting down next summer. I assume the majority of it's aircraft will go to VFA-125. Thereby leaving VFA-147 will mostly new aircraft.....

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 11 Dec 2018, 14:59
by sprstdlyscottsmn
Spaz, do you have a hi-res version of that middle (approach) shot?

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 11 Dec 2018, 15:08
by spazsinbad
No. Probably HiRez may become available at DVIDS or the USN or Lockheed FlickR pages soon or they are there now?

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 13 Dec 2018, 03:38
by spazsinbad
Navy’s Operational F-35C Squadron Declared ‘Safe for Flight;’ Can Prepare for Evaluations, IOC
12 Dec 2018 Megan Eckstein

"The Navy’s first F-35C operational squadron completed its carrier qualifications and was deemed “safe for flight” – the final step in the squadron’s transition from the F/A-18E Super Hornet to the F35C Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter, and an important step in the journey towards reaching initial operational capability.

The “Argonauts” of Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 147 completed their carrier qualifications today aboard USS Carl Vinson (CVN-70) and can now independently conduct flight operations as a squadron, without the assistance and oversight from a fleet replacement squadron.

The “safe for flight” designation means a squadron has the right personnel and equipment, as well as maintenance and safety programs, in place to support itself in conducting routine flight operations. The squadron must also be in physical custody of at least 30 percent of its assigned aircraft and, in the case of new F-35 squadrons, have the Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS) management system installed and operating....

...With the ability to operate independently, the squadron will now continue to train and prepare for upcoming operational tests meant to lead to a February 2019 initial operational capability declaration...."

Source: https://news.usni.org/2018/12/12/navys- ... ations-ioc

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 13 Dec 2018, 06:02
by spazsinbad
F-35Cs VINSON VFAs Carrier Qualification 08-09 Dec 2018 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETViPL3uy1U


Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 13 Dec 2018, 17:04
by ricnunes
#DoNotDisbandVFA-101

or,

#DoNotDisbandGrimReapers

:mrgreen:

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 13 Dec 2018, 23:00
by spazsinbad
Navy Achieves New F-35 Fighter Jet Milestone on USS Carl Vinson
13 Dec 2018 Oriana Pawlyk

"..."The Argonauts' safe-for-flight operations certification was earned through the Herculean effort of squadron sailors and is an acknowledgment that they have developed the skills to safely maintain and operate the F-35C Lightning II," said CJSFW [commander of Joint Strike Fighter Wing] Capt. Max McCoy...."

Source: https://www.military.com/dodbuzz/2018/1 ... inson.html

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 14 Dec 2018, 09:17
by edpop
More video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWcYf440_ZU

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 14 Dec 2018, 14:43
by steve2267
edpop wrote:More video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWcYf440_ZU


If you copy the part of the above URL AFTER THE “v=“, click the YouTube button above, then paste, the forum software will embed the video like this:


Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 14 Dec 2018, 14:52
by steve2267
To my untrained navair eye, the Lightning bounce at catapult initiation does not appear worse than the Super Duper or Classic Bug, does the pilot’s head bounce off the canopy at 2:36, or is it the camera being jostled. Probably need to download the video and step through frame-by-frame.

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 14 Dec 2018, 14:59
by spazsinbad
Yep that pilot is defenestrated out of canopy & will not catapult again - CarQual time when bounce is more PRONOUNCED.

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 28 Feb 2019, 20:55
by spazsinbad
VFA-147 Aerial Change of Command
21 Feb 2019 DVIDS & Commander, Joint Strike Fighter Wing

"190221-N-PP499-0003 NAVAL AIR STATION LEMOORE (Feb. 21, 2019) The “Argonauts” of Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 147 conducts a flyover during the aerial change of command.... (U.S. Navy photo by Logistics Specialist 2nd Class Brandon Bacon/Released)"

Photo: https://www.dvidshub.net/download/image/5125937 (0.5Mb)

Source: https://www.dvidshub.net/image/5125937/ ... ge-command

Re: VFA-147 at Sea

Unread postPosted: 28 Feb 2019, 21:03
by juretrn
The big wings of the -C really look slick in this photo!