U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Military Life and Issues
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-08-2018, 04:40 PM
Status: "Living the good retired life." (set 17 days ago)
 
Location: Wasilla, AK
5,817 posts, read 3,106,453 times
Reputation: 11744

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by SluggoF16 View Post
The USAF did, and has largely replaced navigators as well.

A navigator just recently showed up at our monthly retiree dinner. He was non-retained at the beginning of the year. All of our aircraft now are no-navigator zones. Same with the flight engineers. It's all C-17s and C-130 J models. But we loadmasters still have a seat on the airplane. I figure pilots will be the next to go. But I still see a bright future for loadmasters!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-09-2018, 06:27 AM
 
Location: SW OK (AZ Native)
14,508 posts, read 6,668,237 times
Reputation: 6474
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlaskaErik View Post
A navigator just recently showed up at our monthly retiree dinner. He was non-retained at the beginning of the year. All of our aircraft now are no-navigator zones. Same with the flight engineers. It's all C-17s and C-130 J models. But we loadmasters still have a seat on the airplane. I figure pilots will be the next to go. But I still see a bright future for loadmasters!

The position of "navigator" is now WSO, EWO, or O/DSO (offensive/defensive systems operator). The C-5 got rid of NAVs in the 1980s; I went to pilot training with two NAVs, one from DC-130s (drone carriers, not sure about the utility of having a NAV for that mission unless precise locations were required) and one ANG F-4 WSO. The older C-130s had that celestial dome which did double duty as a way for a spotter to look out for aggressor fighter aircraft. I have done low-altitude aggressor intercepts against C-130s with someone in the dome looking out for me, and it's surprising how hard it is to sneak up on a C-130 when another pair of eyes with 360-degree vision is looking out for the F-16.


Side note: The best way to down a C-130 wasn't with the AIM-120 AMRAAM... that's just not fair. AIM-9 Sidewinders had a hard time with the props dissipating the heat signature. Guns at low altitude were really difficult due to the fact that there was a whole lot of earth in the field of view, and there are serious training rules to prevent an aircraft-dirt exchange. No, the best way was to fly nearly head-on to the cargo aircraft and drop a string of three Mk-82s 500-lb bombs (simulated, of course) with CCIP about 1/4 of a mile ahead of the aircraft (six second time of fall, 250 feet per second for the C-130) and let the victim fly into the frag.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-09-2018, 10:44 AM
Status: "Living the good retired life." (set 17 days ago)
 
Location: Wasilla, AK
5,817 posts, read 3,106,453 times
Reputation: 11744
Quote:
Originally Posted by SluggoF16 View Post
The position of "navigator" is now WSO, EWO, or O/DSO (offensive/defensive systems operator). The C-5 got rid of NAVs in the 1980s; I went to pilot training with two NAVs, one from DC-130s (drone carriers, not sure about the utility of having a NAV for that mission unless precise locations were required) and one ANG F-4 WSO. The older C-130s had that celestial dome which did double duty as a way for a spotter to look out for aggressor fighter aircraft. I have done low-altitude aggressor intercepts against C-130s with someone in the dome looking out for me, and it's surprising how hard it is to sneak up on a C-130 when another pair of eyes with 360-degree vision is looking out for the F-16.


Side note: The best way to down a C-130 wasn't with the AIM-120 AMRAAM... that's just not fair. AIM-9 Sidewinders had a hard time with the props dissipating the heat signature. Guns at low altitude were really difficult due to the fact that there was a whole lot of earth in the field of view, and there are serious training rules to prevent an aircraft-dirt exchange. No, the best way was to fly nearly head-on to the cargo aircraft and drop a string of three Mk-82s 500-lb bombs (simulated, of course) with CCIP about 1/4 of a mile ahead of the aircraft (six second time of fall, 250 feet per second for the C-130) and let the victim fly into the frag.

The C-130H had a sextant port, so the navigator could use the sextant with the escape hatch in place. The bubble was not used for celestial navigation. It was only used for observation purposes in a hostile environment, although we never used them in Afghanistan as there was no concern about enemy aircraft.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-09-2018, 11:40 AM
 
Location: SW OK (AZ Native)
14,508 posts, read 6,668,237 times
Reputation: 6474
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlaskaErik View Post
The C-130H had a sextant port, so the navigator could use the sextant with the escape hatch in place. The bubble was not used for celestial navigation. It was only used for observation purposes in a hostile environment, although we never used them in Afghanistan as there was no concern about enemy aircraft.
That's good to know, I always assumed the bubble and sextant port were one and the same.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-09-2018, 02:13 PM
 
Location: SW OK (AZ Native)
14,508 posts, read 6,668,237 times
Reputation: 6474
This not-too-politically-correct patch was given to those of us who provided the support to the AATTC school down at Fort Huachuca and flew against them in the MOAs of southern AZ. (The symbols are the Enhanced Envelope Gun Sight or EEGS on the center of the C-130.) It wasn't as easy as the patch makes it sound.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-09-2018, 02:22 PM
Status: "Living the good retired life." (set 17 days ago)
 
Location: Wasilla, AK
5,817 posts, read 3,106,453 times
Reputation: 11744
Quote:
Originally Posted by SluggoF16 View Post
This not-too-politically-correct patch was given to those of us who provided the support to the AATTC school down at Fort Huachuca and flew against them in the MOAs of southern AZ. (The symbols are the Enhanced Envelope Gun Sight or EEGS on the center of the C-130.) It wasn't as easy as the patch makes it sound.

I just have the official patch from AATTC (Advanced Airlift Tactics Training Center) and the been there, done that t-shirt. We never had a politically incorrect patch that I ever saw. Being in the bubble in the summer really sucked. The worst thing for the rest of the crew was the bubble boy puking his guts out. In the C-130 world we referred to AATTC training as puke school, although I never did.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-10-2018, 08:08 AM
 
Location: SW OK (AZ Native)
14,508 posts, read 6,668,237 times
Reputation: 6474
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlaskaErik View Post
I just have the official patch from AATTC (Advanced Airlift Tactics Training Center) and the been there, done that t-shirt. We never had a politically incorrect patch that I ever saw. Being in the bubble in the summer really sucked. The worst thing for the rest of the crew was the bubble boy puking his guts out. In the C-130 world we referred to AATTC training as puke school, although I never did.
I had one mission where I heard the call "Brady, knock it off", followed by the explanation that they had too many people on the aircraft hurling their breakfast into little plastic bags. Mission incomplete.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-10-2018, 08:33 AM
 
17,836 posts, read 9,784,518 times
Reputation: 17314
Quote:
Originally Posted by SluggoF16 View Post
I had one mission where I heard the call "Brady, knock it off", followed by the explanation that they had too many people on the aircraft hurling their breakfast into little plastic bags. Mission incomplete.
Had a COPE THUNDER exercise in the Philippines in 87 or so, with Aussies participating: A Mirage squadron, an FB-111 squadron, and a C-130.

In one day, the scenario was that the C-130 (Blue Force) would drop a payload onto the dummy runway on our Crow Valley range while all the fighter aircraft in the exercise (the COPE THUNDER Red Force F-4 squadron, the Aussie Mirage squadron, and an F-16 squadron based in South Korea) were all Red and were hunting the C-130.

So there we are in our bunker on the Crow Valley range, expecting the C-130 at any moment.

We're looking. Nothing.

We're listening. Nothing.

Then we do hear it. But where is it?

We looked toward the mountain range on one side and see the tail of the aircraft moving along the mountain ridge like the fin of a shark above the waves.

In the next moment, the airplane shot up over the mountain ridge and swooped down into the valley, engines roaring.

Our Red ground forces on the range started popping off Styrofoam "GRAIL" rockets, while the C-130 was fishtailing like crazy--wings swinging nearly perfectly vertical, maybe 200 hundred feet off the ground, throwing chaff and flares everywhere.

We were in awe, going, "What the hell!"

Then the plane approached the mark on the dummy runway where it was supposed to drop its payload. It leveled off, the ramp opened, and I swear, the damned thing hovered for a moment--I swear it did! The loadmaster dropped the payload right on the spot.

Then the engines roared again, the plane shot away, fishtailing, throwing chaff and flares, until it disappeared again over the mountain ridge.

We were laughing and slapping our foreheads and going, "WTFO!"

At the debriefing that afternoon, none of the Red Forces for that scenario reported even seeing the C-130.

We had some US intel and ground crew aboard for the ride--they'd puked their guts out.

And we got some complaints from the mayor of O'Donnell about the plane scaring cows and schoolgirls.

The Aussie crew seemed inordinately pleased with themselves.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2018, 06:18 PM
 
Location: Florida
4,353 posts, read 2,405,967 times
Reputation: 7728
In Navy boot camp, 1952, we marched carrying Springfield rifles.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-23-2018, 12:09 AM
 
Location: Tennessee
187 posts, read 190,301 times
Reputation: 482
A friend and I were discussing this issue tonight at work. We both served in infantry battalions in the 1970's. I was assigned to the First Marine Division and he was with an Army infantry unit that deployed to South Korea. We were laughing about the old canvas shelter half. As some of you may recall it consisted of two rectangles of OD canvas with snaps and grommets to accommodate tent line and stakes. Each troop carried a shelter half along with tent poles and stakes. It was strapped to the outside of your rucksack and carried along with everything else that mattered in the field. Once bivouacked you and your "shelter half mate" then snapped them together to fashion a small tent. Invariably, by the time you humped out to the bivouac area someone had usually lost part of a tent pole, or the whole thing or one or all of tent stakes. As a result the process was often doomed to fail. Of course there was no floor to keep out the cold wet ground nor did the canvas do a very good job of keeping out precipitation from the sky. We used these things in our initial training but once I got out to the fleet we never carried them on patrol.

Grunts learn to improvise and there are better ways to remain dry and warm in the field than a shelter half. More often than not that was wrapping up in a nylon poncho and the world famous and much ballyhooed G.I. poncho liner. Army guys call them Woobies. It's comprised of a lightweight nylon fleece, reasonably warm and dries quickly when wet. In my humble opinion it may be the best piece of field gear ever issued to U.S. military personnel. I've had at least one of these things in my possession for the last forty years and there is a poncho liner packed in my "bug out" bag. Thankfully, the U.S. military still issues this fine piece of gear to personnel going to the field.
Attached Thumbnails
Gear you used not in service today-shelter2.png   Gear you used not in service today-woobie.png  

Last edited by irishcopper; 08-23-2018 at 12:17 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Military Life and Issues
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:44 PM.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top