High – Low – High

Much of the recent traffic seems to have been on a north – south [and vice versa] axis; I know from what I’ve seen from the museum site myself that things have certainly changed since the gliders left.

Certainly not like old days with the Wittering Harriers and USAF – RF4Cs and A10s! 🙁

I haven’t seen that much military over East Bridgford (just to the west of Syetston) recently – used to get a load of Tucanos hurtling through at low level

A couple of years ago the low-flying zone in the Newark area [between Cranwell and Syerston] became more used since the Gliding Club had their lease terminated at Winthorpe Airfield. So much so the Newark Air Museum website tries to record some of the activity over the museum, which seems to be used as a way-point.

Albeit not as busy in recent months. :confused:

http://www.newarkairmuseum.org/newsItem.php?id=3

no low flying areas adjacent to Cranwell & Syerston

Lothar,

Not so much the distance to the LFAs as the size and shape of them. LFA8, the Trent valley and Derbyshire, was close to both Syerston and Cranwell but was an awkward and constricted little area. Otherwise it was LFA5 in Norfolk and Suffolk. The Vale of York stations were better served with reasonable training areas on their doorstep but they were of course busy with other users. I used the Main Low Level Route a few times when returning from landaways at Leuchars.

All that apart, the usual mixed profile was high(ish) level radio aids section, descent to low level followed my a medium level visual/radio aids section for recovery. Gave Bloggs a chance to practice/demonstrate the various techniques involved, could be quite demanding.

exmpa

Hi-Lo-Hi in basic training

One of the problems in the 60s/70s was the very restricted Low Flying System with no low flying areas adjacent to Cranwell & Syerston and only a small one close to Rissie so it was the norm to do a Hi-Lo-Hi just to get the low flying in. It was also quite a useful exercise to start students thinking about safety altitudes, let downs to low level etc.

I suspect it’s talking about some basic sort of mission profile; a high level transit, dropping in to low level to attack a simulated target, then RTB at high level (still part of the Tucano syllabus today).:)

Looking at yesterday’s thread, relating to fatigue, any sortie involving low level will have a higher fatigue usage than (for example here) the same route flown at several thousand feet, and IIRC will be recorded as such in the F700.

Precisely that. High level ingress and RTB for fuel efficiency, low level in the target area for accuracy and catching the other side with their trousers down

It did indeed signify a mission profile in both recce Fighter bomber sorties. Piece below may be of some help, at least in recce terms:

“The RF-101C pilots of the 66th TRW developed their own particular brand of low level, high speed photographic reconnaissance. The wing received the accolade of the 7th Army for it’s commitment to Exercise Fair Play from February 2nd to 7th, 1959; when sixteen day reconnaissance missions were flown every day under very adverse weather conditions. Don Karges flew with the 66th Tactical Reconnaissance Wing:

“All training in Europe was based on high speed, low level tactics. The reasons were simple – we had only a day, VMC capability with no ECM or radar warning devices. We did not believe we could survive a heavy SAM environment (above 1000’) and the prevailing weather in Europe would force us to photograph targets at low altitude. A typical mission was 2 hours and 10 minutes and consisted of a high-low- high profile. We would climb to 30,000’ and cruise in a straight line for about 40 minutes, let down below the clouds and fly our planned low level mission at 420kts, 500’ for about30-40 minutes – usually with 2-3 pinpoint targets like com sites, bridges etc. and one route reconnaissance of a highway or railroad.”

Have you tried Military Aircrew on PPrune?

I’m sure you will get a lot more people on there that will be able to answer why the majority of JP4’s were prematurely retired from their intended role.

DD

I suspect it’s talking about some basic sort of mission profile; a high level transit, dropping in to low level to attack a simulated target, then RTB at high level (still part of the Tucano syllabus today).:)

Looking at yesterday’s thread, relating to fatigue, any sortie involving low level will have a higher fatigue usage than (for example here) the same route flown at several thousand feet, and IIRC will be recorded as such in the F700.