Re: INS Alignment at Sea

[Larry]

> How is the INS aligned at sea on a carrier that is moving at 30kts?
Actually it was quite a challenge.

I was AEAN Flight Deck Troubleshooter assigned to VAW-116, launching the
E-2C Hawkeye off the pointy end of the USS Constellation during the WestPac
of 80-81 when we had to do a "handset align" of INS. We all stood around in
a semi-circle (to keep dumb****s from walking thru the turning props) and
when given the signal, I'd go into the island, call SINS and get our PP
(present position). Then I'd go up into the cockpit where they already had a
"rough align" and tell INS where we were. Of course we were just doing
doughnuts out in the middle of the IO. This was called a "handset align" and
was very common when SINS would not transmit via the cable and when an RF
Align was not possible (like during EMCON).

I've been in the cockpit of the Hawkeye (parked abreast the island) and seen
the ground speed display 42 knots- we were HAULING! When they lit up all the
boilers all four screws would really kick up a rooster tail.

I had a ball on the two WestPac's I did aboard the Connie- that was a great
ship with an even better crew :-)


--
Larry
AECS (AW/SW/MTS)
Disabled Combat Veteran
USN Retired

20 years of Navy in my rear view mirror
and getting further away every day ;-)

"Gary Watson" <cf104@ihate spam.shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:yyWob.251407$pl3.192778@pd7tw3no...
> I am conversant with commercial INS and old military INS (LN3) and know
that
> the best alignment occurs when the a/c is stationary. Now my question.
> How is the INS aligned at sea on a carrier that is moving at 30kts? Does
the
> ground crew start an alignment below decks prior to bringing the a/c up
for
> a launch? Also does the Captain have to realign heading on the catapult to
> ensure proper heading reference or is there a slaved compass system in
naval
> military fighters?
>
> Gary Watson
>
>
>

[Doug \Woody\ and Erin Beal]

On 11/1/03 4:35 PM, in article yyWob.251407$pl3.192778@pd7tw3no, "Gary
Watson" <cf104@ihate spam.shaw.ca> wrote:

> I am conversant with commercial INS and old military INS (LN3) and know that
> the best alignment occurs when the a/c is stationary. Now my question.
> How is the INS aligned at sea on a carrier that is moving at 30kts? Does the
> ground crew start an alignment below decks prior to bringing the a/c up for
> a launch? Also does the Captain have to realign heading on the catapult to
> ensure proper heading reference or is there a slaved compass system in naval
> military fighters?
>
> Gary Watson
>
>
>

Gary,

Navy aircraft have two alignment modes. One for shore-based alignments and
one for shipboard alignments. The shipboard alignments require Ship
Inertial Navigation System (SINS) data via either a cable or from an RF data
link. This gives a fairly high quality alignment--it even worked well on
the A-6's IMU/INS.

If for some reason (and it happens) you can't get SINS data, you can
manually enter the ship's present position, speed, heading, and your deck
spotting angle and set the INS up to perform an manual CV alignment.

In the EGI/GPS equipped F/A-18 if THAT doesn't work, you can get a GPS in
flight alignment (IFA) even on deck.

--Woody

[Mike Kanze]

>The shipboard alignments require Ship Inertial Navigation System (SINS)
data via either a cable or from an RF data link. This gives a fairly high
quality alignment--it even worked well on the A-6's IMU/INS.

In the days of the A-6A and its AN/ASN-31 inertial, shipboard alignments
were sometimes colorful and problematic affairs. There were none of the
goodies like RF links or GPS for us to play with.

Mini-sea story #1: On CORAL MARU's 1973 cruise, we (VA-95) found that (1)
most of the SINS cables were beat to hell and wouldn't work because (2) our
predecessor A-6 squadron in CVW-15 - VMA(AW)-224 - didn't know what
alignments were. It took us most of the cruise to weed out and survey the
hopelessly irrepairable cables and gradually accumulate a set of reliable
and maintainable ones.

Mini-sea story #2: On 95's 1975 cruise (still with CVW-15 / CORAL MARU), an
A-6 launched off Taiwan for a penetration flight to exercise ROC air
defenses. The crew obtained an normal SINS alignment, launched (this time
without the all-too-common inertial dump on the cat stroke) and commenced
the penetration. The crew became quite concerned however when the CIP did
not appear at all at the time and configuration briefed. Quickly - and
correctly - determining that they were actually headed for the friendly
shores of the Peoples Republic, they 180ed and bustered back to Mother.
Cause of problem? SINS posit was 40 nm (yes, 40 nm!) in error.

(There is a lot more to this second story than just the above.)

Prurient trivia item #436: The control panel for the AN/ASN-31 is described
in the NATOPS manual as the "Erection Controller Panel".

Owl sends.
--
Mike Kanze

436 Greenbrier Road
Half Moon Bay, California 94019-2259
USA

650-726-7890

"When I read about the evils of drinking, I gave up reading."

- Henny Youngman


"Doug "Woody" and Erin Beal" > wrote in message
...
> On 11/1/03 4:35 PM, in article yyWob.251407$pl3.192778@pd7tw3no, "Gary
> Watson" <cf104@ihate spam.shaw.ca> wrote:
> [rest snipped]

[user]

My 2 cents,,,basically the same as Larry's,,,on the Big 'E' IO in '84
and the Connie IO in '85 we had SINS cable inputs sometimes available
for our US-3's, (Miss Piggy), . Otherwise we would Link with our
ASW-25 (UHF) to get CAINS updated Lat/Longs for the LTN-72's.... our
CODS only had gyros and AHRS (Attitude Heading Reference System),
although we could hook up a RO-RO LTN-72, and an internal 500 gallon
fuel tank for long haul repo flights. (Had a very uneasy feeling
sitting in the cargo compartment with a frickin leaking JP-5 fuel
cell, on numerous flights from PI to Singapore to Diego Garcia, etc.)
I still believe the most cost effective system is a dual AHRS combined
with GPS for the best representation of SA and Navigating. This type
of setup would cost less than a quarter of the over redundant and way
too expensive Ring Laser Gyro INS (over 150,000 per unit) and GPS
sysytems that are predominant in the newer Hornets, Orions and
Prowlers.

On Sat, 1 Nov 2003 20:39:18 -0800, "Mike Kanze"
> wrote:

>>The shipboard alignments require Ship Inertial Navigation System (SINS)
>data via either a cable or from an RF data link. This gives a fairly high
>quality alignment--it even worked well on the A-6's IMU/INS.
>
>In the days of the A-6A and its AN/ASN-31 inertial, shipboard alignments
>were sometimes colorful and problematic affairs. There were none of the
>goodies like RF links or GPS for us to play with.
>
>Mini-sea story #1: On CORAL MARU's 1973 cruise, we (VA-95) found that (1)
>most of the SINS cables were beat to hell and wouldn't work because (2) our
>predecessor A-6 squadron in CVW-15 - VMA(AW)-224 - didn't know what
>alignments were. It took us most of the cruise to weed out and survey the
>hopelessly irrepairable cables and gradually accumulate a set of reliable
>and maintainable ones.
>
>Mini-sea story #2: On 95's 1975 cruise (still with CVW-15 / CORAL MARU), an
>A-6 launched off Taiwan for a penetration flight to exercise ROC air
>defenses. The crew obtained an normal SINS alignment, launched (this time
>without the all-too-common inertial dump on the cat stroke) and commenced
>the penetration. The crew became quite concerned however when the CIP did
>not appear at all at the time and configuration briefed. Quickly - and
>correctly - determining that they were actually headed for the friendly
>shores of the Peoples Republic, they 180ed and bustered back to Mother.
>Cause of problem? SINS posit was 40 nm (yes, 40 nm!) in error.
>
>(There is a lot more to this second story than just the above.)
>
>Prurient trivia item #436: The control panel for the AN/ASN-31 is described
>in the NATOPS manual as the "Erection Controller Panel".
>
>Owl sends.

[Doug \Woody\ and Erin Beal]

On 11/2/03 12:56 AM, in article ,
"user" > wrote:

> My 2 cents,,,basically the same as Larry's,,,on the Big 'E' IO in '84
> and the Connie IO in '85 we had SINS cable inputs sometimes available
> for our US-3's, (Miss Piggy), . Otherwise we would Link with our
> ASW-25 (UHF) to get CAINS updated Lat/Longs for the LTN-72's.... our
> CODS only had gyros and AHRS (Attitude Heading Reference System),
> although we could hook up a RO-RO LTN-72, and an internal 500 gallon
> fuel tank for long haul repo flights. (Had a very uneasy feeling
> sitting in the cargo compartment with a frickin leaking JP-5 fuel
> cell, on numerous flights from PI to Singapore to Diego Garcia, etc.)
> I still believe the most cost effective system is a dual AHRS combined
> with GPS for the best representation of SA and Navigating. This type
> of setup would cost less than a quarter of the over redundant and way
> too expensive Ring Laser Gyro INS (over 150,000 per unit) and GPS
> sysytems that are predominant in the newer Hornets, Orions and
> Prowlers.
>

Foodog,

Dual AHRS/GPS wouldn't meet some of the specs required--especially in the
z-axis velocities.

--Woody

[user]

Yeah good point for high performance aircraft, thanks for the
input....How about for Commercial Air, and military slowmovers?

On Sun, 02 Nov 2003 11:10:42 GMT, "Doug \"Woody\" and Erin Beal"
> wrote:

>On 11/2/03 12:56 AM, in article ,
>"user" > wrote:
>
>> My 2 cents,,,basically the same as Larry's,,,on the Big 'E' IO in '84
>> and the Connie IO in '85 we had SINS cable inputs sometimes available
>> for our US-3's, (Miss Piggy), . Otherwise we would Link with our
>> ASW-25 (UHF) to get CAINS updated Lat/Longs for the LTN-72's.... our
>> CODS only had gyros and AHRS (Attitude Heading Reference System),
>> although we could hook up a RO-RO LTN-72, and an internal 500 gallon
>> fuel tank for long haul repo flights. (Had a very uneasy feeling
>> sitting in the cargo compartment with a frickin leaking JP-5 fuel
>> cell, on numerous flights from PI to Singapore to Diego Garcia, etc.)
>> I still believe the most cost effective system is a dual AHRS combined
>> with GPS for the best representation of SA and Navigating. This type
>> of setup would cost less than a quarter of the over redundant and way
>> too expensive Ring Laser Gyro INS (over 150,000 per unit) and GPS
>> sysytems that are predominant in the newer Hornets, Orions and
>> Prowlers.
>>
>
>Foodog,
>
>Dual AHRS/GPS wouldn't meet some of the specs required--especially in the
>z-axis velocities.
>
>--Woody
>

[Gary Watson]

The dual AHRS/GPs updated types of systems work well in the slow movinn'
easy turning world of commercial air transport. I know the LTN 72, Carousel
IV spinning iron systems from aircraft such as the G-II and L1011 etc and
the RLGs are much much more reliable but this is not in the military
environment.

I was intersted to hear that the alignments would go "south" during the
catapult stage. Did air alignments work out ok as I realize you were getting
lat/long info from another aircraft but can't imagine having the time to
carry out the process.

BTW my interest is because I teach Nav systems to tech school students and
we were discussing INS and the need for a stable airframe for alignment. I
can now go back Monday and answer the question about aligning whilst the
aircrafme is moving. Thanks guys :)

Gary Watson



"user" > wrote in message
...
> Yeah good point for high performance aircraft, thanks for the
> input....How about for Commercial Air, and military slowmovers?
>
> On Sun, 02 Nov 2003 11:10:42 GMT, "Doug \"Woody\" and Erin Beal"
> > wrote:
>
> >On 11/2/03 12:56 AM, in article
,
> >"user" > wrote:
> >
> >> My 2 cents,,,basically the same as Larry's,,,on the Big 'E' IO in '84
> >> and the Connie IO in '85 we had SINS cable inputs sometimes available
> >> for our US-3's, (Miss Piggy), . Otherwise we would Link with our
> >> ASW-25 (UHF) to get CAINS updated Lat/Longs for the LTN-72's.... our
> >> CODS only had gyros and AHRS (Attitude Heading Reference System),
> >> although we could hook up a RO-RO LTN-72, and an internal 500 gallon
> >> fuel tank for long haul repo flights. (Had a very uneasy feeling
> >> sitting in the cargo compartment with a frickin leaking JP-5 fuel
> >> cell, on numerous flights from PI to Singapore to Diego Garcia, etc.)
> >> I still believe the most cost effective system is a dual AHRS combined
> >> with GPS for the best representation of SA and Navigating. This type
> >> of setup would cost less than a quarter of the over redundant and way
> >> too expensive Ring Laser Gyro INS (over 150,000 per unit) and GPS
> >> sysytems that are predominant in the newer Hornets, Orions and
> >> Prowlers.
> >>
> >
> >Foodog,
> >
> >Dual AHRS/GPS wouldn't meet some of the specs required--especially in the
> >z-axis velocities.
> >
> >--Woody
> >
>

[WaltBJ]

Whoa! A CVN at 42 knots? How many water skiers could she tow? What a wake to jump!
walt BJ

[Doug \Woody\ and Erin Beal]

On 11/2/03 12:05 PM, in article CHbpb.260660$6C4.185337@pd7tw1no, "Gary
Watson" <cf104@ihate spam.shaw.ca> wrote:

> The dual AHRS/GPs updated types of systems work well in the slow movinn'
> easy turning world of commercial air transport. I know the LTN 72, Carousel
> IV spinning iron systems from aircraft such as the G-II and L1011 etc and
> the RLGs are much much more reliable but this is not in the military
> environment.
>
> I was intersted to hear that the alignments would go "south" during the
> catapult stage. Did air alignments work out ok as I realize you were getting
> lat/long info from another aircraft but can't imagine having the time to
> carry out the process.
>
> BTW my interest is because I teach Nav systems to tech school students and
> we were discussing INS and the need for a stable airframe for alignment. I
> can now go back Monday and answer the question about aligning whilst the
> aircrafme is moving. Thanks guys :)
>
> Gary Watson
>
>

Gary and Foodog...

With regard to slow movers...
AHRS/GPS would be no problem for slow-movers in my opinion--whether UAV or
domestic air carriers. I wouldn't want to take one overseas--and couldn't
legally in the North Atlantic in RVSM airspace.

With regard to USN INS's...

Occasionally, the mechanical gyroed IMU/INS would dump on the cat when the
alignment was weak or due to some mechanical or electronic glitch. 1/2 of
the time you could IFA it and get it back. In my experience, the ASN-139
RLG INS doesn't care about the cat stroke.

The mechanical INS's would also build insidious, non-obvious
errors--occasionally until they'd dump entirely. Then you could IFA them if
you had the time/airspace.

The RLG fails fast and fails totally if it's broken. It's seldom that
you'll get it back once it fails--unless you caused the failure yourself
(due to incorrect initial coords during the alignment or bad SINS data).

Accurate data (3-axis) is important for many things, but most importantly
for transferring nav data to weapons--especially some of the newer more
complex stuff.

--Woody

[gizmo-goddard]

"WaltBJ" > wrote in message
om...
> Whoa! A CVN at 42 knots? How many water skiers could she tow? >What a wake
to jump!

When Sadat got assassinated, we were in port in Venice. At dusk we weighed
anchor and made mega-neutrons enroute to the coast of Egypt. The Boat was
going so fast that you couldn't even stand in the catwalks. I don't know
what speed we were doing, but it's was as fast as I've ever experienced
onboard any ship.

__!_!__
Gizmo

[Elmshoot]

42 knots was no problem on the big "E" It is my understanding that it has the
highest max speed of all carriers due to its longer waterline and narrower
beam. The snipes told me the limits are the number of twists they can put into
the shafts or the bow being crushed by being forced through the water. I have
seen 50+
Alignments. I went from the A-6 were we learned all the manutia of alignments
to the Prower were it was pretty much turn it on and it works.
First thing is a level then the next is True North since all platform torques
are based on that.
Remember that the Intruder was a weapons delivery platform so it must derive
its position to the nats ass. In the Prowler if it was 1000 feet off no big
deal.
I used to laugh at the 129 cone heads trying to fix True north since it had to
compute TN to milli radians for the allignmet to work. Here he was ham handing
a degree or 2. If the platform alligned the TN was going to be correct.

On the boat Sins cable was prefered then the RF alignment but the first things
that the platform has to do is go to local level then True North then start to
factor in the ships movement. In the A-6 we got a software upgrade (85 or so)
and if everything worked it was 9 minutes to allign. Sometimes the AT
troubleshooter would start the alignment especially if the BN scheduled to fly
the plane was a little weak. I recall 20 minutes to be the norm. I think the
Prowler was faster.

Sparky

[Mike Kanze]

Gary,

>I was intersted to hear that the alignments would go "south" during the
catapult stage. Did air alignments work out ok as I realize you were getting
lat/long info from another aircraft but can't imagine having the time to
carry out the process.

In the early 1970s A-6A, inflight alignments of the AN/ASN-31 inertial
navigation system were both common and more often than not "reasonably"
accurate - at least for providing a stable reference of aircraft heading,
attitude, and horizontal and vertical velocities. The A-6A/B/C NATOPS
referred to these as "rough alignments".

("Reasonably accurate" = accurate enough to complete the mission
successfully.)

An inflight alignment of the ASN-31 required true heading (which one got
from the magnetic wet compass and then adjusted for local magnetic
variation), aircraft velocity and the latitude of the inflight alignment
starting point. B/Ns made it a point to write down the ship's current
LAT/LONG during shipboard (SINS) alignments, since the cat shot was the most
likely flight phase for an inertial dump and the inflight alignment could be
started almost immediately after launch.

Entering the LONG in addition to the other three parameters above usually
produced a fix for the inertial accurate to +/- 3 to 5 miles, depending upon
the distance traveled by the ship between SINS alignment and inertial dump.
(There was also a fair amount of dead reckoning thrown in here as well,
using inputs like ship's estimated course and speed changes since SINS
alignment.)

In the A-6A, the real keeper of position was the AN/ASQ-61 ballistics / nav
computer and not the ASN-31. It obtained its initial reference from the
ASN-31's aligned position, and took as inputs throughout the flight the
velocities generated by the ASN-31. The ASQ-61 also took inputs from the
aircraft's pitot-static system, radars, and the knobology activities of the
crew.

During the mission the crew would update the ASQ-61's position with fixes
off the search radar, or visually if crossing a known position like the CIP.
These updates minimized computed position errors.

At least that was how it was SUPPOSED to work. <g>

As Woody and others point out things are much different today, especially
the need for accurate posit inputs into the smart weapons we didn't have
back in the early 1970s.

--
Mike Kanze

436 Greenbrier Road
Half Moon Bay, California 94019-2259
USA

650-726-7890

"When was the last time in world history in which 'suicide' and 'martyrdom'
were the code of enlightened action admired by any society?"

- Roy Fassel (WALL STREET JOURNAL, 10/27/03)


"Gary Watson" <cf104@ihate spam.shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:CHbpb.260660$6C4.185337@pd7tw1no...
> [rest snipped]

[Doug \Woody\ and Erin Beal]

On 11/2/03 8:42 PM, in article ,
"Elmshoot" > wrote:

> 42 knots was no problem on the big "E" It is my understanding that it has the
> highest max speed of all carriers due to its longer waterline and narrower
> beam. The snipes told me the limits are the number of twists they can put into
> the shafts or the bow being crushed by being forced through the water. I have
> seen 50+
> Alignments. I went from the A-6 were we learned all the manutia of alignments
> to the Prower were it was pretty much turn it on and it works.
> First thing is a level then the next is True North since all platform torques
> are based on that.
> Remember that the Intruder was a weapons delivery platform so it must derive
> its position to the nats ass. In the Prowler if it was 1000 feet off no big
> deal.
> I used to laugh at the 129 cone heads trying to fix True north since it had to
> compute TN to milli radians for the allignmet to work. Here he was ham handing
> a degree or 2. If the platform alligned the TN was going to be correct.
>
> On the boat Sins cable was prefered then the RF alignment but the first things
> that the platform has to do is go to local level then True North then start to
> factor in the ships movement. In the A-6 we got a software upgrade (85 or so)
> and if everything worked it was 9 minutes to allign. Sometimes the AT
> troubleshooter would start the alignment especially if the BN scheduled to fly
> the plane was a little weak. I recall 20 minutes to be the norm. I think the
> Prowler was faster.
>
> Sparky
>
>

Sparky,

The reason for the difference is that the Prowler used the same ASN-130 that
the early F/A-18 used. In fact, I think it has been upgraded to ASN-139
lately.

--Woody

[Doug \Woody\ and Erin Beal]

On 11/3/03 8:27 AM, in article ,
"Pechs1" > wrote:

> cf-<< I am conversant with commercial INS and old military INS (LN3) and know
> that
> the best alignment occurs when the a/c is stationary. Now my question.
> How is the INS aligned at sea on a carrier that is moving at 30kts? >><BR><BR>
>
> geeezzz, INS, GPS....what a bunch of girls..
> P. C. Chisholm
> CDR, USN(ret.)
> Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer

Ouch. Here I thought I was a stud. |:-)

[John Carrier]

Two axis VGI, TACAN and ADF, cockpit lighting by afterthought, single
engine, "interesting" dirty flying qualities. A night in the life I'm glad
is far behind me.

OBTW, T-45 GINA (integrated GPS/INS) has no SINS cable. Uses GPS in the
ship alignment mode and must calculate ship's movement null factor (whatever
the hell that is). From power-up: Full alignment on concrete = 3 minutes.
Full alignment in flight = 6-7 minutes. Full alignment on flight deck =
16-24 minutes. Go figure.

R / John

"Doug "Woody" and Erin Beal" > wrote in message
...
> On 11/3/03 8:27 AM, in article
,
> "Pechs1" > wrote:
>
> > cf-<< I am conversant with commercial INS and old military INS (LN3) and
know
> > that
> > the best alignment occurs when the a/c is stationary. Now my question.
> > How is the INS aligned at sea on a carrier that is moving at 30kts?
>><BR><BR>
> >
> > geeezzz, INS, GPS....what a bunch of girls..
> > P. C. Chisholm
> > CDR, USN(ret.)
> > Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye
Phlyer
>
> Ouch. Here I thought I was a stud. |:-)
>

[Mike Kanze]

We "girls" led more than one little lost lamb of a fighter through the goo.
And gave them gas as well.

--
Mike Kanze

436 Greenbrier Road
Half Moon Bay, California 94019-2259
USA

650-726-7890

"When was the last time in world history in which 'suicide' and 'martyrdom'
were the code of enlightened action admired by any society?"

- Roy Fassel (WALL STREET JOURNAL, 10/27/03)


"Pechs1" > wrote in message
...
> cf-<< I am conversant with commercial INS and old military INS (LN3) and
know
> that
> the best alignment occurs when the a/c is stationary. Now my question.
> How is the INS aligned at sea on a carrier that is moving at 30kts?
>><BR><BR>
>
> geeezzz, INS, GPS....what a bunch of girls..
> P. C. Chisholm
> CDR, USN(ret.)
> Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye
Phlyer

[Doug \Woody\ and Erin Beal]

On 11/3/03 2:17 PM, in article , "John
Carrier" > wrote:

> Two axis VGI, TACAN and ADF, cockpit lighting by afterthought, single
> engine, "interesting" dirty flying qualities. A night in the life I'm glad
> is far behind me.
>
> OBTW, T-45 GINA (integrated GPS/INS) has no SINS cable. Uses GPS in the
> ship alignment mode and must calculate ship's movement null factor (whatever
> the hell that is). From power-up: Full alignment on concrete = 3 minutes.
> Full alignment in flight = 6-7 minutes. Full alignment on flight deck =
> 16-24 minutes. Go figure.
>
> R / John
>

John,

Hornet EGI (Embedded GPS/INS) produces fairly similar numbers--slightly
longer for the concrete alignment (5-6 mins for the full 0.5 OK). Using the
GPS to generate POS/AINS (aided nav) is at the pilot's option.

GPS IFA's in flight take about 6-8 minutes. CV on-deck alignments are about
12-15 or so depending. Although on my last cruise I found myself
occasionally wrestling the jet through 3 alignments before getting the third
one to take (about a 25 minute evolution) with the Boss querying me for a
status as I took the third one.

--Woody

[J. McEachen]

Boy do I feel old. In the true bomber days of the A-3 we actually
carried a chronometer and a bubble sextant, shot the stars and got a
three-point fix. Ditto the sun and LAN local apparent noon. Plus a
"potty" of sorts and a working p-tube. Box lunches were in order, 3 or 4
hour cycles were the norm (I even flew once with Charlie James refueling
from A-4 tankers for eight hours.) We'd estimate surface winds by
checking the sea, and we even did pressure pattern navigation out to
Bermuda.

What's all this about gyros and other gizmos? (OK, Whidbey started
getting ASB-7 c. 1961 while we on the east coast stuck with the modified
Norden ASB-1a bombing system.)
Joel McEachen VAH-5 (Mushmouths)

Mike Kanze wrote:

> We "girls" led more than one little lost lamb of a fighter through the goo.
> And gave them gas as well.
>

[Gary Watson]

Old Girls??
Try doing a "must make it" approach into one of our winter wonderland
seismic strips on Melville Island NWT (That's just past Resolute Bay for
those that don't know the North) with 100 + nuthing in snow using an ****ty
DG and a very good set of Eyeballs, or motoring around the Beaufort Sea with
ADFs and a very erractic Omega. Of course this wasn't combat as no one
except the locals were shooting at us when we were in Alaska flying out of
Barrow. (wait a minute isn't that the same thing?) I found a few 30-30 holes
in our Aztec so I guess that applies :)
Sum of us old Farts really like using the new stuff after those days :)

GW
EX RCAF with 20+ years in the North where men are men and Polar Bears are
always hungry



"Doug "Woody" and Erin Beal" > wrote in message
...
> On 11/3/03 8:27 AM, in article
,
> "Pechs1" > wrote:
>
> > cf-<< I am conversant with commercial INS and old military INS (LN3) and
know
> > that
> > the best alignment occurs when the a/c is stationary. Now my question.
> > How is the INS aligned at sea on a carrier that is moving at 30kts?
>><BR><BR>
> >
> > geeezzz, INS, GPS....what a bunch of girls..
> > P. C. Chisholm
> > CDR, USN(ret.)
> > Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye
Phlyer
>
> Ouch. Here I thought I was a stud. |:-)
>

[Bill Kambic]

"J. McEachen" wrote in message

> Boy do I feel old. In the true bomber days of the A-3 we actually
> carried a chronometer and a bubble sextant, shot the stars and got a
> three-point fix. Ditto the sun and LAN local apparent noon. Plus a
> "potty" of sorts and a working p-tube. Box lunches were in order, 3 or 4
> hour cycles were the norm (I even flew once with Charlie James refueling
> from A-4 tankers for eight hours.) We'd estimate surface winds by
> checking the sea, and we even did pressure pattern navigation out to
> Bermuda.

YOU feel old?!?!?!?!?!

Hell, I used to teach the MK6 Plotting Board to S2 types as FASOTRAGRULANT
QUONSET & CECIL in '72-'73!!!!! :-)

My primary traning film was made during WWII (and that's a No ****; we were
ordered to destroy it in 1973 due to references to "Japs" and other
politically incorrect language and immagery; we kept using it until the S2
program shut down).

> What's all this about gyros and other gizmos? (OK, Whidbey started
> getting ASB-7 c. 1961 while we on the east coast stuck with the modified
> Norden ASB-1a bombing system.)
> Joel McEachen VAH-5 (Mushmouths)

The good old Stoof had the ASN-30A. It was an electro-mechanical plotter
that got fed by a TAS computer, gyro, and doppler radar. The warranty was
good for 3 traps and/or arrestments. Then it would give up the ghost and it
was back to the ouija board (MK6). And, of course, the polar plotting
charts used by the 'Shoes (I can't remember the designation). Trying to do
Julie plotting at 100' using dividers with string attached to calculate A+B
elipses was interesting work.

Bill Kambic

If, by any act, error, or omission, I have, intentionally or
unintentionally, displayed any breedist, disciplinist, sexist, racist,
culturalist, nationalist, regionalist, localist, ageist, lookist, ableist,
sizeist, speciesist, intellectualist, socioeconomicist, ethnocentrist,
phallocentrist, heteropatriarchalist, or other violation of the rules of
political correctness, known or unknown, I am not sorry and I encourage you
to get over it.

[Mike Kanze]

Gary,

>Of course this wasn't combat as no one except the locals were shooting at
us when we were in Alaska flying out of Barrow.

Sea story time.

When RA-5C community set up shop at NAS Albany, GA (ex-Turner AFB) they
brought with them a quaint Naval Air tradition unknown to those whose
aviation horizons had been limited to the Blue Suit way of life:

Night FCLPs.

One of my RAN buddies told me that he saw more muzzle flashes over the
approach end of the duty runway than during two cruises over Route Pack 6.

So you don't need to freeze your cajones off to have your aircraft shot at
in North America.

--
Mike Kanze

436 Greenbrier Road
Half Moon Bay, California 94019-2259
USA

650-726-7890

"When was the last time in world history in which 'suicide' and 'martyrdom'
were the code of enlightened action admired by any society?"

- Roy Fassel (WALL STREET JOURNAL, 10/27/03)


"Gary Watson" <cf104@ihate spam.shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:wkEpb.284805$6C4.114869@pd7tw1no...
> Old Girls??
> Try doing a "must make it" approach into one of our winter wonderland
> seismic strips on Melville Island NWT (That's just past Resolute Bay for
> those that don't know the North) with 100 + nuthing in snow using an
****ty
> DG and a very good set of Eyeballs, or motoring around the Beaufort Sea
with
> ADFs and a very erractic Omega. Of course this wasn't combat as no one
> except the locals were shooting at us when we were in Alaska flying out of
> Barrow. (wait a minute isn't that the same thing?) I found a few 30-30
holes
> in our Aztec so I guess that applies :)
> Sum of us old Farts really like using the new stuff after those days :)
>
> GW
> EX RCAF with 20+ years in the North where men are men and Polar Bears are
> always hungry
> [rest snipped]

[John Penta]

On Mon, 3 Nov 2003 19:22:51 -0800, "Mike Kanze"
> wrote:

>Gary,
>
>>Of course this wasn't combat as no one except the locals were shooting at
>us when we were in Alaska flying out of Barrow.
>
>Sea story time.
>
>When RA-5C community set up shop at NAS Albany, GA (ex-Turner AFB) they
>brought with them a quaint Naval Air tradition unknown to those whose
>aviation horizons had been limited to the Blue Suit way of life:
>
>Night FCLPs.
>
>One of my RAN buddies told me that he saw more muzzle flashes over the
>approach end of the duty runway than during two cruises over Route Pack 6.
>
>So you don't need to freeze your cajones off to have your aircraft shot at
>in North America.


Query: FCLPs?

[Bill Kambic]

Field
Carrier
Landing
Practice

Bill Kambic

If, by any act, error, or omission, I have, intentionally or
unintentionally, displayed any breedist, disciplinist, sexist, racist,
culturalist, nationalist, regionalist, localist, ageist, lookist, ableist,
sizeist, speciesist, intellectualist, socioeconomicist, ethnocentrist,
phallocentrist, heteropatriarchalist, or other violation of the rules of
political correctness, known or unknown, I am not sorry and I encourage you
to get over it.

?

[Leanne]

>Night FCLPs.

Here locally, MCAS Beaufort has it put in the local newspaper when
FCLP's are scheduled. They are all back on the deck by put to bed
by 2300.

Leanne

[Pechs1]

John-<< Two axis VGI, TACAN and ADF, cockpit lighting by afterthought, single
engine, "interesting" dirty flying qualities. A night in the life I'm glad
is far behind me. >><BR><BR>

C'mon John, didn't ya enjoy being 'lost' everytime ya lost sight of the CV?(Me
neither)...

I remeber one transit(VF-151, Midway-Maru) where we flew, daytime, complete
Ziplip, just to FAGAT, but the F-4 guys had to stay overhead the CV, so not to
get lost. Interestingly, the only guy to break ziplip was a A-7 guy who's
system crashed...
P. C. Chisholm
CDR, USN(ret.)
Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer

[Pechs1]

Mike-<< We "girls" led more than one little lost lamb of a fighter through the
goo.
And gave them gas as well. >><BR><BR>


Yep, nuthin' better than a KA-6 or KA-7 as pathfinder..But we got to stand up
in the RR, puff out of chests, shake our big watches and say how we found the
boat following the trail of trash and oil left behind the CV during EMCON
recoverys.
P. C. Chisholm
CDR, USN(ret.)
Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer

[Doug \Woody\ and Erin Beal]

On 11/4/03 9:53 AM, in article ,
"Pechs1" > wrote:

> Mike-<< We "girls" led more than one little lost lamb of a fighter through the
> goo.
> And gave them gas as well. >><BR><BR>
>
>
> Yep, nuthin' better than a KA-6 or KA-7 as pathfinder..But we got to stand up
> in the RR, puff out of chests, shake our big watches and say how we found the
> boat following the trail of trash and oil left behind the CV during EMCON
> recoverys.
> P. C. Chisholm
> CDR, USN(ret.)
> Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer

I'm puffing my chest right now. Been there. Done that. Your point is
valid, Pechs. I've noticed that the art of looking outside is waning. I'll
bet Masher sees that in the training command now too.

--Woody

[Elmshoot]

> I've noticed that the art of looking outside is waning. I'llbet Masher sees
>that in the training command now too.--Woody

Yep,
It is prevelant in the airlines as well. Day severe clear the Pilot flying,
(hint not me). Briefs the engine out profile (if any) for the runway in use.
Then I quip in "its nice weather outside how about we look outside and not hit
anything." pregnet pause... then the other guys says "ya, good idea" Then I
say, "I always wanted to do a low flyby of the _______ " fill in the blank for
the airport in use.
Sparky

[John Carrier]

> I'm puffing my chest right now. Been there. Done that. Your point is
> valid, Pechs. I've noticed that the art of looking outside is waning.
I'll
> bet Masher sees that in the training command now too.

Actually, the trend started in June 1971 when the USN abruptly transitioned
from mostly VFR to exclusively IFR. Radial and DME became paramount, not
position over the ground.
We've made some progress back. I'm sure you can still dimly recall the
visual reference points for Area 4 FAM, but sometimes ...

One of the questions I ask a stud during his FAM EP brief is what he'll do
if he finds himself somewhat lost without any nav aids or comm. The simple
logic of reciprocal headings, time and distance, and easily identified
landmarks occasionally escapes them.

We get the studs to back up their nav with the system where its
appropriate. Sometimes that can create overdependence ... but a drifting
waypoint can cure that pretty quickly. I try to insure they are presented
with scenarios in which the system is useless and also at least one in which
its essential. My favorite "graduation present" is a total system dump
where they have a peanut gyro, a wet compass, a clock, standby pitot-static
instruments and TACAN bearing/range presented as an alpha-numeric ... nordo
and about 13 minutes of battery time. A consciousness expanding and
character building exercise.

R/ John