The Friday Flyby - 06 December

A long, long time ago, back when dinosaurs ruled the Earth...

Okay, so it wasn't that long ago. But it was in the last quarter of the last century, '75 to be precise, Yours Truly was preparing to join the mightiest aerial force to ever bomb an enemy back into the Stone Age. Yup, the United States Air Force.

The Air Force that killed MiGs and still had a Strategic Air Command.

Yeah, those guys.

I was asked what I wanted to do in the Air Force. As I had not the eyesight to actually fly the great beasts of the air, I was resolved to work on them. I wished to become an aircraft maintainer. (Have I mentioned from time to time that I'm not always the "sharpest knife in the drawer"?)

At the time there were two maintenance jobs that my recruiter figured I'd be good at, both involved weapons control systems. One job was to maintain the F-4 Phantom II (the one I eventually picked), the other was on the F-111 "Aardvark" (not it's official name, for it never had one).

I chose the F-4 due to there being more duty stations available. At the time, the F-111 lived in only two places, Plattsburgh AFB, New York and RAF Lakenheath in the United Kingdom. Oh, I was sorely tempted at the mention of the UK. Then my recruiter mentioned that they deployed a lot. After he explained "deploy" to me (for I was young and green in the ways of the military in those days) I decided to go Phantoms. What would be the point of being stationed in England if one was never actually, you know, in England.

But since that day I have had a soft spot for the Aardvark. So here she is.

F-111 of the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF)

From Wikipedia -

The General Dynamics F-111 "Aardvark" was a medium-range interdictor and tactical strike aircraft that also filled the roles of strategic bomber, reconnaissance, and electronic warfare in its various versions. Developed in the 1960s by General Dynamics, it first entered service in 1967 with the United States Air Force. The Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) also ordered the type and began operating F-111Cs in 1973.

The F-111 pioneered several technologies for production aircraft, including variable-sweep wings, afterburning turbofan engines, and automated terrain-following radar for low-level, high-speed flight. Its design influenced later variable-sweep wing aircraft, and some of its advanced features have since become commonplace. The F-111 suffered a variety of problems during initial development and several of its intended roles, such as naval interception, with the F-111B, failed to materialize.

USAF F-111 variants were retired in the 1990s, with the F-111Fs in 1996 and EF-111s in 1998. The F-111 has been replaced in USAF service by the F-15E Strike Eagle for medium-range precision strike missions, while the supersonic bomber role has been assumed by the B-1B Lancer. The RAAF was the last operator of the F-111, with its aircraft serving until December 2010.

The U-2 incident of May 1960, in which an American CIA U-2 spy plane was shot down over the USSR, stunned the United States government. Besides greatly damaging Soviet relations, the incident showed that Russia had developed a surface-to-air missile that could reach aircraft above 60,000 feet. The United States Air Force Strategic Air Command (SAC) and the RAF Bomber Command's plans to send subsonic, high-altitude B-47 and V bomber formations into the USSR were now much less viable. By 1960, SAC had begun moving to low-level penetration. This greatly reduces radar detection distances; and, at that time, SAMs were ineffective against low-flying aircraft, and interceptor aircraft did not have as large a speed advantage at low-level. The Air Force's Tactical Air Command (TAC) was largely concerned with the fighter-bomber and deep strike/interdiction roles. TAC was in the process of receiving its latest design, the Republic F-105 Thunderchief, which was designed to deliver nuclear weapons fast and far, but required long runways. A simpler variable geometry wing configuration with the pivot points further out from the aircraft's centerline was reported by NASA in 1958, which made swing wings viable. This led Air Force leaders to encourage its use. In June 1960, the USAF issued specification SOR 183 for a long-range interdiction/strike aircraft able to penetrate Soviet air defenses at very low altitudes and high speeds. The specification also called for the aircraft to operate from short, unprepared airstrips.

In the 1950s the United States Navy sought a long-range, high-endurance interceptor aircraft to protect its carrier battle groups against long-range anti-ship missiles launched from Soviet jet bombers and submarines. The Navy needed a fleet air defense (FAD) fighter with a more powerful radar, and longer range missiles than the F-4 Phantom II to intercept both enemy bombers and missiles. Seeking a FAD fighter, the Navy started with the subsonic, straight-winged aircraft, the Douglas F6D Missileer in 1957. The Missileer was designed to carry six long-range missiles and loiter for five hours, but would be defenseless after firing its missiles. The program was canceled in December 1960. The Navy had tried variable geometry wings with the XF10F Jaguar, but abandoned it in the early 1950s. It was NASA's simplification which made the variable geometry wings practical. By 1960, increases in aircraft weights required improved high-lift devices, such as variable geometry wings. Variable geometry offered high speeds, and maneuverability with heavier payloads, long range, and the ability to takeoff and land in shorter distances.

11-Ship Formation of Aardvarks

F-111 Trap

F-111 On Deck

RAAF 6 Squadron F-111 Fuel Dump
(Often mistaken for afterburner, see next photo)

RAF Lakenheath Bird, Actually in 'Burner
(i.e. not dumping fuel)

EF-111A "Raven" Flying in Operation Deny Flight
(Bosnia)

Great Shot of an Aussie 'Vark

F-111F and EF-111A in Formation

Above the Clouds

So yeah, this could have been me!

Dust, Are You There?

Dust, I see you left a comment regarding using Gravatar. Said comment above was in my Gmail, but not in the referenced post.

Blogger has been acting goofy all day, other folks who use this have also noted that. Bottom line is, not sure if Blogger doesn't like Gravatar or if it was some "feature" introduced by the folks at Google.

They're always toying with the code. It's what bit-whackers do. I know, I are one.

Try again. If that doesn't work, try (shudder) Google+. So simple to use even I figured it out.

You'd think that they'd make this crap easy for us old(er) fogies.

Guess not...

(For those of you wondering "What the heck?" Dust is an old comrade from the Mothership, so yes, he gets special attention. FWIW, I try to give ALL of my readers special attention. It's what I do, I'm a giver. Stop laughing Buck.)

Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go work on tomorrow's Flyby.

What's that? A hint, you want a hint?

Grumble, grumble...

Okay, here you go - 

No, the post isn't about clouds!

Alrighty Then...

Buddy of mine showed me that headline on Wednesday (read about it here).

I pointed out to him that that was rather a large amount of data. I think I actually said, "Scott, that's a crap ton of data!" As in, no way they could go through all of it, every day. In addition to all of the other electronic data they collect.

"But they have computer programs that sift through all of that data very rapidly."

I stood there in silence for a moment, then offered, "Dude, we're software guys, we both know how difficult it is to write really efficient, fast code. Do you realize how complex that code has to be to go through all of that data?"

"But they hire really good programmers to..."

"Wait a minute there Scott. Do you realize how little the government pays its ordinary employees? Hell, we make more than most of them. Besides all the really sh!t hot programmers work for Google, or one of the big game companies. That's where the money is."

"Dude, think about how the government works. I mean really, do you think that the guys who brought us the non-functioning ObummerCare website could actually hire people to write code so sophisticated as to go through hundreds of terabytes of data a day and extract really useful, actionable intelligence?"

"Oh, yeah..."

While I may be underestimating the capabilities of government computer programmers (after all, I used to be one of those), we sometimes give too much credence to the whole "Big Brother is watching, government is all powerful" meme. They may be watching somebody, but typically it's not Joe Average citizen, that kind of surveillance gets expensive in a big hurry.

Unless of course, you've done something to show up on the government's radar. Like threaten to blow something up. The software is sophisticated enough to "listen" for key words and phrases and flag those conversations. But then a human needs to dig through the data and determine if it really is a threat.

So let's not all panic at once. Too many people see the NSA and other intelligence agencies like this -

The All Seeing Eye of Sauron in Mordor

But don't think for a minute that U.S. intelligence agencies are like this guy -

Wile E Coyote on the Lookout for the Road Runner

As always the truth lies somewhere in between those two extremes. For the most part these folks are pretty much like us. Their commute to work probably sucks worse than the average American's (have you ever driven in DC traffic?) They worry about paying their bills and count the days until they get to go on vacation.

Just like the rest of us.

So yeah, they're more like this -

Or this,

So yeah, definitely not like these guys -

Nope, the intelligence agencies are nothing like the IRS. (Just kidding!)

Drone Drone

Over at Lex's place, there was much talk about the use of unmanned aircraft, the ethics of warfare using unmanned systems, and the different attitudes between the Navy and Air Force over the programs.  While the USAF decided nearly 2 years ago to not push for a new class of UAVs,the Navy had already gone "all-in" on the UCAS and MQ-8B Fire Scout UAVs.  At that time, the junior service planned to rely on upgrading its existing fleet of Reapers and Predators.  Whereas the Navy had spent over $800M on just the Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle before it even went to the boat.

MQ-1B Predator

MQ-9 Reaper

X-47B UCAS-D Approaching USS George H.W. Bush at the 180^o  

UCAS at the end of CAT 2.

The X-47B UCAS Demonstrator has had some noteworthy successes, both ashore and at sea, with the system completing catapult launches and arrested recoveries on schedule.  The Fire Scout is a bit more mature with a deployment to Afghanistan under its belt, but integration with the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) awaiting both ships and mission packages.

Air Force may just understand that the fiscal environment isn't conducive to buying new toys, or it could be protecting its manned aircraft turf, not willing to trade cockpits for new UAVs.  While the Navy, not owning a fleet of UAVs like the AF isn't likely risking manned cockpits by developing the ones it has.

While the UCAS vehicle may not make the transition to the fleet, testing of the aircraft continues.  The UCAS technology will be used by Northrop Grumman to develop a combat aircraft by the end of the decade.  I could see it used in an unmanned recovery tanker role as well, although with a somewhat larger vehicle or stores load.

While Lex didn't get the chance to see the UCAS at the boat, he probably wouldn't be cheering it, as he wrote back in October 2011:

"It gives me no pleasure to say this, but I have consistently believed that, despite all of the hoopla surrounding UAVs and the enthusiasm for ridding the skies of manned strike fighters, when troops are in contact and the enemy is danger close, you want the guy dropping the bomb sharing the same battlespace as the guys he’s protecting. On the same frequency, oriented to the same threats. Hearing their voices."

As for UAVs replacing pilots as a whole, "Gladiator ONE" doesn't see it:

"To think we're not going to show up . . . should a shooting war start is crazy," said Cdr. Brent "Stretch" Blackmer, VFA-106's commanding officer.  "There's going to be so much jamming, so much electronic attack, so many trons flying downrange"..."We're going to be way closer than anybody expected."

But I think he's making the Navy's point for them.  With a heavy Anti-Access/Area-Denial (A2AD) threat environment, risking a pilot isn't the way the Navy is planning its future.  Unmanned aircraft might be more susceptible to getting shot down due to lower speed or maneuverability, but it's just a big flying piece of metal, not human flesh that has mom and dad back home (and voting).

The purpose of Naval Air isn't to conduct Combat Air Patrol (CAP), it's not for hunting submarines, it isn't to jam, conduct Intelligence, Surveillance and Recon., rescue downed pilots, etc.  Those are great missions, but they're all support missions.  Naval Aviation exists for one reason only- Strike Warfare- to put bombs on target.

If the Navy can figure out how to put smaller, less costly UAVs like the Reaper on our CVNs, if we can swarm an enemy with strike-capable aircraft which we can risk losing, either through attrition or kamikaze attacks, we can transform the carrier, the aircraft, and Naval history.  I fully agree with Lex in that nothing's better in the Close-Air-Support mission than a guy overhead that you know has got your back.  However, I expect technological advancements can improve the fidelity of that mission area as well.

The Hornet and JSF pilots probably don't need to worry about Naval Air changing anytime soon however. My boss humorously states that the reason the military exists is not just to fight and win our nations wars, but also to employ our nation's workforce- to build ships, aircraft, and employ civilians.

Why else would we buy 20+ C-27J Spartan aircraft that we don't need?  Who else would employ a civilian workforce that is nearly equal to the size of our uniformed force?  Why do we need two completely different LCS classes, except to keep a midwest shipyard open?  The instances abound where the DoD has been forced to develop, build, purchase, and maintain systems that weren't the best for our warfighters, but had strong political support.

If the Military Industrial Complex can figure out how to keep hugely expensive ship-classes afloat, keep the DoD drunk on massively expensive technological advancements, and transform warfare into battles fought by unmanned systems, all the while continuing to employ civilians and that industrial complex, then we very well may see the majority of our flight decks covered by UAVs.  Since all politics is local, and employing civilians means votes, I fully expect to see it in my lifetime.

Der Große Ahornsirup Offensive Frühjahr 1945*

Boy Soldiers of the Wehrmacht
In a Captured Sugar Maple Grove

A little known battle of World War II occurred in the spring of 1945 and was fought not in Europe or the Pacific but in the rugged mountains of New Hampshire.

What? Are you kidding? I know you're probably saying to yourselves, "Why didn't I learn about this in school? Is this another failure of public education? Oh my word, what's next?"

Um, no. None of the above.

Actually when I was visiting the ancestral lands up north for Thanksgiving, The Olde Vermonter trotted out that photo above. That's him on the left, holding what is (I believe) a toy M-14. The Musician is that dashing lad on the right, with the camouflaged Thompson submachinegun. Yup, my two kid brothers. Wearing those toy German helmets my Dad brought back from Milwaukee. (Hhmm, why Milwaukee?)

I'm not sure where I might have been for that photo, as it looks exactly like the type of mischief I would have been up to back in those days. Now I have written about the "old days" before, back in May it was. But I had quite forgotten the toy M-14s we once had. This photo reminded me of that awesome faux firearm from "back in the day".

The Marx M-14

The Business End of the Marx M-14

Now the first kid on the street to have one of these was Curt. He lived down at the bottom of the street and didn't really hang out with "The Magnificent Seven" from "up the street". Top of the hill boys we were. Didn't have no truck with them fellers down in the low lands!

Actually Curt's family was the first to live on our street, the street itself bore his family's name. So he'd been around for a while and already had his own circle of friends, down there on the lower streets. We hill folk were all newbies to them. We did mingle from time to time though. Perhaps like Cro Magnons and Neanderthals may have hung out together, back when Buck, Virgil, Joe and Skip were still young fellas. (Ahem, those guys are all several years older than I. The last wooly mammoth had died many months before I was born. About the time Greg was born. I think.)

At any rate, Curt stopped by once and asked if we felt like playing army. Well, he did have that magnificent toy shooting iron (with the orange tip that would move, kinda like flame shooting out the barrel, along with that cool takka-takka-takka sound it made).

Naturally from that day forth, The Olde Vermonter and I pleaded with the parental units for our own M-14s. After all, while we did have our Tommy guns, they were certainly out-ranged by the M-14. Really, we told our Mom and Dad, do you want to create an arms gap between the hill folk and them thar flatlanders?

Well, eventually we did get M-14s. The Musician was still a bit young for that kind of thing, he had to use hand-me-downs, like the camouflaged Tommy gun. Still, better than anything else on the street, other than the M-14 of course.

Of course, when my brothers and I weren't out seizing my grandparent's sugar maples for the Reich, we also indulged in les affaires aériennes**. Things that flew were always popular with my brothers and I.

So imagine our wonder and delight when Mom and Dad bestowed Steve Canyon helmets upon us one fine Christmas. I mentioned those back in May, but my Mom (who, by the way, is somewhat miffed about not having her very own "nom de blog" - I need to work on that) found the following photo of The Olde Vermonter and I this past Thanksgiving.

Yours Truly (Aircraft Commander, left seat) and The Olde Vermonter (YOT)***

The picture above is what we actually looked like. The next couple of photos are a pretty accurate depiction of what was going on in our imaginations!

Ah, good times!




The Fine Print
In the interests of full disclosure, The Olde Vermonter and I debated what this post should be titled. My first thought was Hitler's Maple Syrup. Nope, too "hitlerish". The Olde Vermonter then suggested Sap Nazis. Nope, too much of a Seinfeld rip-off. Hey, I know let's call it Nazi Saps! Ya know, it belittles Nazis and is funny too.

In the final analysis, none of that worked for me. So I started playing around with Google Translate (like I need an excuse to play with that!) The result is what you see.

I had no idea that maple syrup in German was Ahornsirup. Or as Buck might say, "I had no ideer..."

My brothers and I, militaristic? No, what gave you that idea?

Footnotes

* The great maple syrup offensive of spring 1945. An event which never happened. I swear!

** Aerial affairs, you know how I love to inject foreign stuff into the blog!

*** YOT = You Over There, the Weapon Systems Officer in the F-111, aka the WSO.

I Think These Guys Are Hysterical

These two guys are hysterical. To me at any rate. I loved Mr Sasso on MAD TV, his characters were always kinda bumbling yet always funny. As for Mr Caliendo, I think I first saw him on Letterman. Loved his John Madden, loved his George W. Bush.

Then yesterday I stumbled across this bit with the two of them in it. From MAD TV. I think I stopped laughing some time this morning. Then I watched it again. Still laughing...

I apologize for the blurriness of the footage. Still hysterical. To me at any rate.

Ladies and gentlemen, Pachino and DeNiro go for ice cream.

Speaking of My Brothers...

The video above was shot by my brother, The Olde Vermonter. The dog running about is Daisy, the new Chihuahua/Min Pin mix I mentioned the other day. She is the cutest little thing. I'm not completely sure how that deer feels about her though.

Oh yeah, the video was shot in the environs of the ancestral home. Backyard-ish in fact.

And here's why I call my youngest kid brother The Musician.

Little brother has quite a collection of tunes on YouTube, of course I highly recommend that you go watch them.

He used to blog here, but he hasn't updated it in a very long time. And (for those who do such things) his Facebook page is here.

He's a talented guy. I'm not saying that The Olde Vermonter and Yours Truly are not talented guys. The Olde Vermonter's superb skill at carpentry can be seen at The Chester Inn, in Chester, Vermont and in many fine homes throughout the Twin States, I'm sure.

As for me? Hhmm. Good question.