The day of the unmanned aircraft. By Dave Majumdar on May 15, 2013

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2013/05/the-day-of-the-unmanned-aircra.html

“…However, the X-47B did not carry out an arrested landing upon returning to Pax River. That could be because the unmanned jet was having difficulty making even that first trap it did the week before where the Navy showed off a video of the aircraft snagging a wire. Sources told the DEW Line, at the time of the earlier trap, the aircraft now had a 10 percent field boarding rate… So hopefully, this isn’t an indication of a major problem. The X-47B guys have had to redesign their tail hook a number of times now due to the same inaccurate Navy-supplied wire dynamics model that was partly responsible for the F-35C’s woes….”
_____________________

The F-35C hook troubles have mostly been solved with final damper fix (hook point change OK) to be tested soonish and all the details likely well covered in this forum from old threads/posts. Here is some info on how the X-47B hook was fixed (apparently):

Fleet Readiness Center “hooks up” unmanned aircraft 05 Sept 2012

http://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.NAVAIRNewsStory&id=5114

“…To land on the flight deck of a carrier, aircraft need a tailhook to catch one of four arresting wires. When unsuccessful roll-in arrestment tests of the X-47B revealed the need for a modi-fied hook point, the team needed to come up with a plan to make the modifications in order to perform arrested landings and catapult launches this fall….
…Since then, the X-47B success-fully engaged the arresting gear with the redesigned hook point during three separate roll-in arrestment tests….”
_______________________

“The X-47B Unmanned Combat Air System (UCAS) demonstrator aircraft completes a successful roll-in arrestment with a modified arresting hook point designed and manufactured by Fleet Readiness Center Southwest (FRD-SW) Aug.14 [2012] at Patuxent River, Md. FRCSW delivered the hook point just 46 days after receiving a request from the Navy UCAS program office.”

http://www.navair.navy.mil/img/uploads/X_47_GCTV_Still.JPG

The things I have read from his fellow AVG pilots* seem to indicate that he was “nothing remarkable” in his flying skills.

Considering the quality of the AVG pilots who survived their first 10 missions, however, that is nothing to be ashamed of… as they were all “above average”.

I believe (from those comments and his own words on his time in the AVG in his autobiography*) that his time in China had the most impact in terms of being a “school” where he learned the difference between what the Army/Navy/Marines thought about Japanese aircraft and how to fight them, and what really worked… both individually and in group tactics.

These lessons were critical in enabling both his later personal success and in his ability to teach others how to fight and survive in the air.

* I have had both Boyington’s autobiography (the 1977 re-printing) and the 1976 reprinting of Col. Robert L. Scott’s memoir (God is My Co-pilot, written in 1943) since ~1978.

Naturally, Scott doesn’t even mention Boyington, since not only was VMF-214 not yet in the news, but (as I mentioned) Boyington had not made enough impression on other pilots in the AVG for them to mention him to Col. Scott (who joined the former AVG when it was absorbed into the USAAF in mid-1942). Boyington had been at a different airfield when Scott had temporarily flown with the AVG in May 1942, and he had returned to the US (and the USMC) just before Scott transferred.

I have read interviews with a couple of the other famous AVG pilots back when the Baa Baa Black Sheep TV series was on network TV, and they said that he didn’t stand out because they all drank too much, fought each other too much, and had problems with authority. He was as good as them in the air, but not noticeably better… but then they were all better than most (in their own opinion).

OK, I’ve uploaded a few more.

First, compare this photo (not mine) to the last one above… the tail-hook on the F11F Tiger folded forward for stowage… this could only be done in-flight or if the aircraft was jacked up to allow the hook to swing clear of the deck.

Here are more of mine:

The Mirage III and the F-8 were contemporaries… Australia considered both before choosing the Mirage. If upgrades similar to the French F-8E(FN)s were made, it would have done fine.

The quartet of four 20-mm cannon was retained, as well as the ability to carry four fuselage-mounted AIM-9B Sidewinder missiles. However, provision was also made to accommodate the French-built Matra R530 air-to-air missile, which existed in both infrared and semi-active radar homing versions. One R530 was carried on each side of the fuselage on rail launchers. Often, an infrared-homing R530 would be carried in one side of the fuselage, with a radar-homer on the other side. To accommodate the R530 in its radar-homing version, a Magnavox AN/APQ-104 radar was fitted, together with a modified AN/AWG-4 fire control system.

OK, here are some sources for you to ignore:

http://www.defencemanagement.com/news_story.asp?id=19664

In an interview with The Daily Telegraph, Hammond said that “the facts have changed” since 2010’s Strategic Defence and Security Review chose to operate the F-35C ‘cat and trap’ carrier variant, citing affordability and performance reasons.

The F-35B, which is capable of short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL) was the original choice of aircraft when the Queen Elizabeth class carriers were ordered.

Hammond told The Daily telegraph that the choice of aircraft “depends on what you want to do”.

“Different aircraft do different things,” he said. “It’s about thinking about the military effect we want to deliver then working out the most cost-effective way to deliver it.”

The F-35C was considered to be the cheaper option at the time of the SDSR, but the cost of fitting the electromagnetic aircraft launch system to just one carrier has been estimated as high as £1.8bn since.

http://www.defencemanagement.com/news_story.asp?id=19704

The UK has cancelled plans to operate the F-35C, the carrier variant of the F-35 joint strike fighter, due to the estimated £5bn cost of converting both Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers to operate the ‘cat and trap’ launch system, it can be revealed.

The price of converting both carriers, which were designed with ‘ski jump’ angled decks to launch the F-35B, would have reached the astronomical figure, equivalent to doubling the cost of the aircraft carrier programme, due to the need for intrusive work to fit the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System.

A senior Ministry of Defence source told DefenceManagement.com that while HMS Prince of Wales, the second carrier, could have been converted for some £2bn, allowing the use of the F-35C, the cost of retrofitting the system to HMS Queen Elizabeth would then have cost a further £3bn due to a need to conduct major alterations to some 290 of the carrier’s compartments and minor work to a further 250. At the time of the SDSR it was believed conversion could be carried out with adjustments to just 80 compartments at a cost of less than £1bn per carrier.

The conversion work would also have led to a three-year delay in the carrier programme, with full capability from one carrier not available until 2023, something Defence Secretary Philip Hammond said he was “not prepared to tolerate”.

…..

The MoD source confirmed that some £40m had been spent on conversion investigation, but that no work except the ‘negligible’ removal of components for the angled deck of one carrier had been undertaken. The build process had not been delayed by the investigation, the source said.

http://www.defensenews.com/article/20130506/DEFREG02/305060007/US-Carrier-Launch-Pushed-Back-4-Months

The launch of the US aircraft carrier Gerald R. Ford has been moved back from July to November, a consequence of production delays identified two years ago.

The move comes weeks after the US Navy and shipbuilder Newport News Shipbuilding moved the ship’s delivery from September 2015 — which has been the contracted date for some years — to early 2016.

“We’ve been tracking and reporting schedule risk for several years and actively working to retire that risk,” Chris Johnson, a spokesman for Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) said May 7 in an email. “Following a detailed review of the schedule in February 2013, the Navy and the shipbuilder concluded that a delay in the launch would allow the shipbuilder to complete the remaining critical path work and allow for increased outfitting to most economically complete the ship.”

Earlier, Johnson acknowledged the problems associated with the first ship of a new design.

“Certainly it’s not ideal, but in this case it is very much a first-of-class issue. And those ships have challenges.”

…..

Newport News Shipbuilding, a division of Huntington Ingalls Industries, is the only shipbuilder in the world capable of building full-sized nuclear-powered aircraft carriers.

The shipbuilder, in a statement released Monday, acknowledged its problems in making up the schedule delays. HII’s statement in full:

“Working closely with the Navy, we have revised the Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78) launch date from July 2013 to November 2013. Although actions to resolve first-of-class issues have retired significant schedule risks, the revised launch date allows increased outfitting and ship construction that are most economically done prior to ship launch.

“As the first new design carrier beginning construction in more than 40 years, CVN 78 is designed to provide increased capability and reduced total ownership cost by about $4 billion compared to Nimitz-class carriers. For this first-of-class ship, construction commenced in parallel with design completion based on earlier decisions at [the] Department of Defense. Ongoing design during the construction process caused delay and inefficiencies in procurement, manufacturing, and assembly.

“We have demonstrated that delaying launch (and therefore delivery) to allow for increased outfitting and construction prior to launch is the most economical path forward to deliver the tremendous capability and affordability improvements resident in Ford. “

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/campaigns/our_boys/4915492/Royal-Navy-air-ace-is-first-Brit-in-US-Top-Guns.html

Has it really taken 44 years before a British pilot (not even RAF :() has been deemed good enough to qualify for this course?

Ever heard of this chap:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/military-obituaries/naval-obituaries/8873213/Brigadier-General-Dick-Lord.html

No, its just the first time that the RN hasn’t been able to train its own fighter pilots.

Dick Lord and his friends were instructors… Stephen Collins is just the first Brit to attend as a student.

More threads on Key about this aircraft:

http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?111522-Grumman-F11F-Tiger

http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?54481-Grumman-F11F-2-Super-Tiger