Bager1968Like the US Army’s OH-58 Kiowa being an improved, slightly enlarged version of the civil Bell 206 JetRanger?
Bager1968This is indeed more a management screw-up than an engineering one… not enough “slack” was allowed in the promised schedule to allow for the “unexpected” problems of development. The Engineers expect “unforseen” glitches (they forsee that there will be glitches, they just can’t tell in advance what they will be). Management expects everything to go “according to schedule”!
An example is a company I worked for in 1991. They manufactured computer-controlled machines that inserted parts on circuit boards. They decided to start a side-line of small-scale circuit-board assembly, and hired several people (myself included). What killed the project (and my employment there) was the sales staff.
Each salesperson promised their customer delivery on a schedule that assumed that that was the only project we would be working on. It is really hard to stay on schedule when sales has booked 100% of your time for each of 3 contracts, but schedule all 3 to be done at the same time!!
Needless to say, we quickly gained a poor reputation for performance (especially after one manager (ex-production supervisor) attempted to get us back on schedule by coming in after hours and shipping out a set of boards that still needed 2 hand-installed components to be installed in each).
Existing orders were cancelled, and no new ones were obtained, ending the experiment.
Bager1968“There is already a thread with these photos!”
What thread (since you seem to want to keep it a secret, I’ll guess… that 500 page “Russian Navy” one)?
And of course, once a pic is posted, it can never be posted again?
Bager1968According to other posters on other boards, the AW149 is the military version of the AW139 civil helicopter.
Bager1968Nice to see the VMFA(AW)-242 “Black Bat” -D model… I deployed to Japan with them in 1984… when they were flying A-6E Intruders.
VMFA(AW)-242 ‘Bats’ share lessons learned in Iraq
Marine Corps News Story Identification #: 2005427173441 Story by Cpl. Jonathan K. Teslevich
MARINE CORPS AIR STATION MIRAMAR, Calif. (April 26, 2005) — The “Bats” of Marine All Weather Fighter Attack Squadron 242, Marine Aircraft Group 11, 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing, hosted members of the Marine aviation community April 20 at the Miramar Officers’ Club for a “hotwash” of their role in Operation Iraqi Freedom.
More than 100 officers and enlisted Marines sat quietly as officers representing VMFA-242 (AW) explained their living and working conditions, aircraft maintenance, mission planning and tactics used during their eight-month deployment to Iraq.
The squadron deployed to Iraq with 202 Marines, 12 F/A-18D Hornets and 19 plane crews. They were combat ready within four hours of arrival and had a full flight schedule operating within 36 hours of arrival.
“Our challenge was to support the coalition force, primarily Marines of the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force, at a pace three times higher than normal without a significant increase in personnel or equipment,” said Maj. Jeffrey G. Hancock, operations officer, VMFA-242 (AW). “To provide close-air support and fulfill other tasking, we flew an average of 110 hours per month – (with a peak of more than 1,452 hours during a major engagement in Fallujah, Iraq) – and carefully plan for and supervise the utilization of Marines, aircraft, and equipment, in order to prevent an accident and to have the greatest effect on the enemy.”
The Marines and Sailors with VMFA-242 (AW)sustained the pace for over 210 days with little down time, all the while dropping 75 percent of the ordnance for I MEF, often within danger close, or within 200 meters of friendly forces, without a single “fratricide” incident.
“Keeping Marines mentally focused was a challenge, working eight months, 12 hours on, 12 off, with two maintenance days really began to take a toll, but through some creative scheduling and supervision by our staff noncommissioned officers, we were able to schedule a day off every six days for most of our (aircraft) maintainers,” said Maj. Thomas E. Frederick, maintenance officer, VMFA-242 (AW). “The results were phenomenal support to the (I MEF) commander, but it took a toll on the senior maintainers and aircrew.”
One key that every speaker emphasized was the electrical conditions in Iraq. “Make sure you address your power concerns; external power was unreliable, generators are at a premium and our (supply and logistics section) brought five generators with us and essentially saved the day,” Frederick said. “It is hard to accomplish a technical mission without connectivity.”
The actual missions conducted by the Bats included close air support, convoy escorts, counter improvised explosive device patrols, cordon, search and raid operations, as well as armed reconnaissance and precision strikes.
“Time on station was the key; responding to a call for CAS within what ground commanders call ‘two minutes to live’ was aided by the ’embedding’ of forward air controllers within ground units,” Hancock stated. “We couldn’t have done any of it without the Litening advanced targeting pod, which was much improved over past systems.”
In addition to other lessons the Bats passed on to their peers, Hancock provided sage advice to those deploying to Iraq in the future. “This is your opportunity to help develop a nation and protect your homeland from foreign threats. Your individual actions and sacrifices are vital to the United States and to the preservation of freedom worldwide. Make it count,” he said.
Bager1968yes, Avro 683=Lancaster
Bager1968The Photo-recon version of the Bearcat (indicated by the P suffix) was perhaps the only version of that aircraft to see action in Korea.
See this discussion:
http://p216.ezboard.com/fwarships1discussionboardsfrm8.showMessage?topicID=2162.topic
Bager1968Ah yes… call up a tanker for the PM (or a spare Prince or two) and have them sit on the “troop-quality” seats for a 14+ hour flight to Oz or Japan?
And what about the conference-calls he needs to make in-route? The military commo suite is not compatable with the civilian government’s commo gear.
No, he needs an aircraft equipped specifically for that specific job… including a place to sleep so he can waste all day sparring with inconsequential MOPs who have no real point to their questions (they just want the T.V. “face time”), fly all night to get to the G-8 or some such conference, and then spend the next 16 hours talking with the other national leaders without falling on his face from fatigue!
Bager1968That’s what I get for looking at my copy of Jane’s Fighting Ships very late at night (actually early morning) while already running on too little sleep!
(and not actually reading the captions as I copied the photos)
Thanks for the nudge & correction.
Bager1968“‘POCKET BATTLESHIP’ (Of the deutschland class 11,000 tons 6 x 11 guns)
Deutschland (later Lutzow)
Admiral Graf Spee
Admiral Scheer”
The German Navy never referred to them as “PB”… that was an invention of others!
The official designations are as follows:
Aircraft Carrier = Flugzeugtrager: Graf Zeppelin, B [both incomplete]
Battleship = Schlachtschiffe: Bismarck, Tirpitz
Battlecruiser = Schlachtkreuzer: Scharnhorst, Gneisenau
Armoured Ship = Panzerschiffe: Deutschland (later Lutzow), Admiral Scheer, Admiral Graf Spee
Heavy Cruiser = Schwere Kreuzer: Admiral Hipper, Blucher, Prinz Eugen, Seydlitz, Lutzow [last 2 incomplete]
Light Cruiser = Leichte Kreuzer: Emden, Konigsberg, Karlsruhe, Koln, Leipzig, Nurnberg
Raider Cruiser (Auxiliary Cruiser) = Handels-Stor-Kreuzer (Hilfskreuzer) [official designation after conversion started with “HSK”]
Bager1968CVN-72 George Washington, CVN-76 Ronald Reagan.
The small wake behind the Kitty shows a speed of 10-15 knots.
Hardly a race, but an amusing thought, none-the-less.
Of course, if one of the two reactors on the CVNs scrams for some reason, they would be limited to ~25 knots max, while the loss of one of Kitty’s 8 boilers would only reduce her from 33 knots to ~30-31 knots.
Bager1968An aside on the DDL… as part of the overall RAN programme, there was also an effort to develop a replacement for the first 4 DEs (Yarra, Parramatta, Stuart, Derwent).
To further this, and RAN-RN cooperation, Australia historically contributed ~35% of the development costs of the “Amazon” class Type 21 ASW Frigates in the late 1960s, planning to order 5… but none were ordered.
If this money had been applied to the DDL, could it have actually been built (at least the first 3)?
Note that the Swan & Torrens were ordered in 1964 and laid down in 1965, so they were NOT part of the escort replacement program that I am talking about.
Bager1968Of course she should have been left in the swamp!!!
After all, there she would nicely and picturesquely have rotten into nothing in another 50 or so years… just so we could see her “in her natural state” and as a “proper war relic”… at least while she still existed!
To actually try to preserve her for more than just us and our teenage kids… How revolting!!
Our grandkids don’t deserve the privilege of seeing these beutiful machines… Let them rot in place I say!!
ARE YOU GUYS SERIOUS???
“Let it rot in place”?
I fully approve of at least properly preserving her… maybe in a manner similar to the P-40 at Anzio? That would keep her “War Relic” heritage, while insuring she is still around in 2044!
Bager1968Since the Tomcat is 62′ 8″ (19.1 m) long, and the Falcon is 49′ 4″ (15.03 m) long, it is also obvious that the F-14 is not only below, but well to the right, of the F-16.
Bager1968“we haven’t bought any secondhand warships since WWII!”
HMS Duchess?
commissioned (RN) 23 October 1952
loaned to RAN 8 May 1964
purchased by RAN 1972
to training ship 1974
decommissioned 24 October 1977
listed for disposal 1979
sold 20 December 1979
Total combined service life of 25 yrs & 2 day!
Sign In
