New Queer? for the fleet, EF-18G [Archive]

Ogden Johnson III

December 30th 03, 03:32 PM

"J" > wrote:

>"fudog50" > wrote in message

>>"J" > wrote:

>>>Boeing won a $1 billion contract yesterday (12/29/03) to develop an
>>>electronic attack version of the Super Hornet called the EA-18G. (from
>>>Washington Post)

>> Any details on the contract? How about the SOW? I'd be interested to
>> see it, along with the milestones and when DT/OT/IOC is supposed to
>> take place.

>Jezzz! I told you it came from the Washington Post. Go there and look it up
>for yourself self, they are a major newspaper and they even have a web site.

Here you go, foodog. Red Rider was apparently having a bad day. Most
of us will post the URL of a news article we're discussing.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A39893-2003Dec29.html

[Noting that sometimes, even with that day's hard copy of the
Washington Post in my hand, I've had trouble finding an article of
interest on the web site. Which is why I always look it up on the web
site before posting about it here. So that I can include the URL,
once I've managed to find it. ;->]
--
OJ III
[Email sent to Yahoo addy is burned before reading.
Lower and crunch the sig and you'll net me at comcast]

Andrew Toppan

December 30th 03, 11:39 PM

On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 21:31:01 -0800, "Yofuri" > wrote:

>Old news; already built and flying. Looking for a job?

EF-18G built and flying? According to who? The Navy apparently doesn't think
so, or they wouldn't have awarded a large contract to develop the aircraft.

F/A-18E/F is "built and flying". EF-18G has been under discussion and
preliminary development for some time, so the contract is no surprise.

--
Andrew Toppan --- --- "I speak only for myself"
"Haze Gray & Underway" - Naval History, DANFS, World Navies Today,
Photo Features, Military FAQs, and more - http://www.hazegray.org/

fudog50

December 31st 03, 12:39 AM

Unsat J,
Thanks to O.J for pasting the link, (which says absolutely
nothing about the questions I asked), so go "JEEZ" yourself for cryin
out loud! Do you even know what DT/OT and IOC are? I'll leave it at
that.
Yeah, there were some pictures of a "Growler" with jammer pods
floating around about 3 years ago, with CAG-3 and HST lettering on it.
We could never tell if it was a touched up photo or not. I was under
the impression it was just an F model with pods slung on it for photo
ops. We all knew it was pretty much a done deal. Lots of questions
remain about when and where the testing and eventually the home basing
will be. If Whidbey wants it, they better hurry up and build an engine
test cell that won't get melted by them GE 400's.

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 13:44:05 GMT, "J" > wrote:

>Jezzz! I told you it came from the Washington Post. Go there and look it up
>for yourself self, they are a major newspaper and they even have a web site.
>
>"fudog50" > wrote in message
...
>> Any details on the contract? How about the SOW? I'd be interested to
>> see it, along with the milestones and when DT/OT/IOC is supposed to
>> take place.
>>
>> On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 04:57:06 GMT, "J" > wrote:
>>
>> >Boeing won a $1 billion contract yesterday (12/29/03) to develop an
>> >electronic attack version of the Super Hornet called the EA-18G. (from
>> >Washington Post)
>> >
>>
>

Allen Epps

December 31st 03, 12:45 AM

In article >, Andrew Toppan
> wrote:

> On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 21:31:01 -0800, "Yofuri" > wrote:
>
> >Old news; already built and flying. Looking for a job?
>
> EF-18G built and flying? According to who? The Navy apparently doesn't think
> so, or they wouldn't have awarded a large contract to develop the aircraft.
>
> F/A-18E/F is "built and flying". EF-18G has been under discussion and
> preliminary development for some time, so the contract is no surprise.
>
> --
> Andrew Toppan --- --- "I speak only for myself"
> "Haze Gray & Underway" - Naval History, DANFS, World Navies Today,
> Photo Features, Military FAQs, and more - http://www.hazegray.org/
>
The F airframe has been fitted and flown with the the ALQ-99 pods which
will used as exiting as GFE or Government Furnished Equipment for the
project. The ESM pods on the wingtips have been flown and have gone
through extensive integration work. The simulator and avionics
integration work has been going on for at least 7 years as I flew the
sim in St Louis back in the 96 timeframe. It's evolved nicely and I
flew the more recent verion on a roadshow at Andrews last year. All in
all Boeing/Mcair as put a lot of their own money into this project
over the last little bit knowing the Navy would figure out the Prowler
was going to die much quicker than the projected. I would regard the
technology as low risk, the question will be more who gives up a slot
for E/F production if the Navy decides they want the airframes sooner
than 09.
The next issue is why keep them at Whidbey (except for airspace and
whole lot of other reasons not the least of which is Elk hunting and
steelhead fishing) ;^

Pugs

Elmshoot

December 31st 03, 05:20 AM

>The next issue is why keep them at Whidbey (except for airspace and
>whole lot of other reasons not the least of which is Elk hunting and
>steelhead fishing) ;^
>

Ah I remember it well. The VAQ-35 Ops Rod and Gun club. The wind would be
howling snow flurries coming down at an 85 degree angle. These knuckel heads
would show up at work. Get the 75 minutes of work that they would spend all day
doing done in about 60 minutes. And then ask if they could go out and lay in a
freshly harvested corn field and wait for a duck to fly over.....
At least the squadron picknic later that month was interesting when the
bachelors would show up with a meat dish. The Wives Club girls from the big
city would be scarfing down huge quanities of duck or some other animal of the
wild until they learned the truth. I though one or two was going to puke on the
spot.

Back to the subject... What happens to the fly by wire jet when the master bad
is turned on? Can you say EMI?

Yofuri

December 31st 03, 07:19 AM

Shucks, I had forgotten we had snow here at Whidbey. Today is the first
snowfall in six years, and it's melting tonight.

No big EMI problem. The isolated power systems for the main bangers largely
keep it away from the aircraft's internal circuitry. The RATS eat the EMI,
in other words. I'm sure the gold-plated canopy will still be required,
though.

Rick

--
My real e-mail address is:

"Elmshoot" > wrote in message
...
> >The next issue is why keep them at Whidbey (except for airspace and
> >whole lot of other reasons not the least of which is Elk hunting and
> >steelhead fishing) ;^
> >
>
> Ah I remember it well. The VAQ-35 Ops Rod and Gun club. The wind would be
> howling snow flurries coming down at an 85 degree angle. These knuckel
heads
> would show up at work. Get the 75 minutes of work that they would spend
all day
> doing done in about 60 minutes. And then ask if they could go out and lay
in a
> freshly harvested corn field and wait for a duck to fly over.....
> At least the squadron picknic later that month was interesting when the
> bachelors would show up with a meat dish. The Wives Club girls from the
big
> city would be scarfing down huge quanities of duck or some other animal of
the
> wild until they learned the truth. I though one or two was going to puke
on the
> spot.
>
> Back to the subject... What happens to the fly by wire jet when the master
bad
> is turned on? Can you say EMI?

-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

fudog50

December 31st 03, 08:41 AM

ummmm yeah we can say EMI, and nothing will happen to the flight
controls when you jam. What, did VAQ-35 have experimental jammers that
jammed in the 60-400hz range? Remember? Jamming in the bandwidths and
freqs we jam in has nothing to do with onboard avionics and flight
control systems, otherwise every A/C in a current strike package would
be affected? Plus, extensive lab and flight testing is done before we
field a system,,,,,what exactly are you getting at elmshoot? Also,
without going into detail, you are forgetting that there is such a
thing as directional jamming? OBTW, glad you are perpetuating the myth
of Whidbey, I'll continue it,,,THE WEATHER THERE IS NASTY AND IT RAINS
300 DAYS OUT OF THE YEAR!!! So stay away, do your best to NOT get
stationed there!! ;)

On 31 Dec 2003 05:20:23 GMT, (Elmshoot) wrote:

>>The next issue is why keep them at Whidbey (except for airspace and
>>whole lot of other reasons not the least of which is Elk hunting and
>>steelhead fishing) ;^
>>
>
>Ah I remember it well. The VAQ-35 Ops Rod and Gun club. The wind would be
>howling snow flurries coming down at an 85 degree angle. These knuckel heads
>would show up at work. Get the 75 minutes of work that they would spend all day
>doing done in about 60 minutes. And then ask if they could go out and lay in a
>freshly harvested corn field and wait for a duck to fly over.....
>At least the squadron picknic later that month was interesting when the
>bachelors would show up with a meat dish. The Wives Club girls from the big
>city would be scarfing down huge quanities of duck or some other animal of the
>wild until they learned the truth. I though one or two was going to puke on the
>spot.
>
>Back to the subject... What happens to the fly by wire jet when the master bad
>is turned on? Can you say EMI?

fudog50

December 31st 03, 08:55 AM

First snowfall in 6 years???

It must have been a dream, the 3-4 inches (some places in Island
County got 6) of the white stuff that closed the base (except for
non-essentials) for 2 days in December 2001. Not nitpicking
Yofuri,,,but maybe you were deployed?

The Gold Plated Canopy required? for what? So the crew would feel
protected??? LOL, it sure never was "required" when it had delaminated
and there were no replacements back in 1999-2001!!! And the only way
you could get a replacement is if the delamination affected the pilots
vision, "safety of flight". (and/or if a Geekmos helmet had banged
away a Iarge percentage) I heard Jacksonville remedied this awful
situation and got more funding to start RFI'ng canopies about the end
of 2001. Then the first batches they put out were defective, but it
finally was fixed.

Yofuri, these comments may seem negative, sure hope you don't take
them that way, my perspective thats all, Happy New Year!!!

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 23:19:19 -0800, "Yofuri" >
wrote:

>Shucks, I had forgotten we had snow here at Whidbey. Today is the first
>snowfall in six years, and it's melting tonight.
>
>No big EMI problem. The isolated power systems for the main bangers largely
>keep it away from the aircraft's internal circuitry. The RATS eat the EMI,
>in other words. I'm sure the gold-plated canopy will still be required,
>though.
>
>Rick

fudog50

December 31st 03, 09:01 AM

The ranges in the cascades and olympics maybe??? Also, the
ALQ-99 support??? CVWP maybe??? You mentioned a "whole lot of other
reasons", which there are many. I think the biggest competition on the
west coast would be Lemoore of course, but I've heard about the noise
complaints and lack of hangar space there. Yes, there are noise issues
in Whidbey, I had to sign sort of a waiver when I bought my house
there 10 years ago that I knew I was in a certain noise area.. But I
know from experience here at the Lake and up at Whidbey, that the
400's are quieter than those 408 A/B's. It all depends which
politico's go for it the most I suppose.
I only hope from a logistics standpoint that they decide to
base it on both coasts. As a prior Prowler MMCO, it is very painful
and expensive to move 5 jets and 155 personnel plus all the support
items necessary cross country every deck cert, TESTA 1/2, TESTA 3/4,
COMPTUEX and JTFEX, just like the Tomcat guys have to do going east to
west. And very expensive.

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 19:45:34 -0500, Allen Epps
> wrote:

>In article >, Andrew Toppan
> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 21:31:01 -0800, "Yofuri" > wrote:
>>
>> >Old news; already built and flying. Looking for a job?
>>
>> EF-18G built and flying? According to who? The Navy apparently doesn't think
>> so, or they wouldn't have awarded a large contract to develop the aircraft.
>>
>> F/A-18E/F is "built and flying". EF-18G has been under discussion and
>> preliminary development for some time, so the contract is no surprise.
>>
>> --
>> Andrew Toppan --- --- "I speak only for myself"
>> "Haze Gray & Underway" - Naval History, DANFS, World Navies Today,
>> Photo Features, Military FAQs, and more - http://www.hazegray.org/
>>
>The F airframe has been fitted and flown with the the ALQ-99 pods which
>will used as exiting as GFE or Government Furnished Equipment for the
>project. The ESM pods on the wingtips have been flown and have gone
>through extensive integration work. The simulator and avionics
>integration work has been going on for at least 7 years as I flew the
>sim in St Louis back in the 96 timeframe. It's evolved nicely and I
>flew the more recent verion on a roadshow at Andrews last year. All in
>all Boeing/Mcair as put a lot of their own money into this project
>over the last little bit knowing the Navy would figure out the Prowler
>was going to die much quicker than the projected. I would regard the
>technology as low risk, the question will be more who gives up a slot
>for E/F production if the Navy decides they want the airframes sooner
>than 09.
>The next issue is why keep them at Whidbey (except for airspace and
>whole lot of other reasons not the least of which is Elk hunting and
>steelhead fishing) ;^
>
>Pugs

Pechs1

December 31st 03, 02:49 PM

many-<< EF-18G built and flying? According to who? >> 

But what about tankers? What do current airwings, populated by a bunch of
'Bugs' use? Refueling packages on the wings of other Bugs??

Is the S-3 gone as a tanker?

Is there any plan to convert some of these to permanent KS-3s(A good idea,
IMO)?
P. C. Chisholm
CDR, USN(ret.)
Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer

Mike Kanze

December 31st 03, 03:51 PM

>OBTW, glad you are perpetuating the myth of Whidbey, I'll continue it,,,THE
WEATHER THERE IS NASTY AND IT RAINS 300 DAYS OUT OF THE YEAR!!! So stay
away, do your best to NOT get stationed there!! ;)

And then there's Rock Fever - a fatal disease. <g>

--
Mike Kanze

" . . . Greed powers the capitalist impulse as gasoline powers the
combustion engine, and, like gasoline, has noxious properties that must be
monitored."

- Julia Homer, Editor-in-Chief - CFO Magazine, December 2003

[rest snipped]

Mike Kanze

December 31st 03, 03:54 PM

Back in the early 1970s when the Prowler was hitting the fleet, the question
in FITRON Ready Rooms was, "How much gas can it give?"

Plus ça change!

--
Mike Kanze

" . . . Greed powers the capitalist impulse as gasoline powers the
combustion engine, and, like gasoline, has noxious properties that must be
monitored."

- Julia Homer, Editor-in-Chief - CFO Magazine, December 2003

"Pechs1" > wrote in message
...
> many-<< EF-18G built and flying? According to who? >> 
>
> But what about tankers? What do current airwings, populated by a bunch of
> 'Bugs' use? Refueling packages on the wings of other Bugs??
>
> Is the S-3 gone as a tanker?
>
> Is there any plan to convert some of these to permanent KS-3s(A good idea,
> IMO)?
> P. C. Chisholm
> CDR, USN(ret.)
> Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye
Phlyer

Allen Epps

December 31st 03, 04:33 PM

In article >, fudog50
> wrote:

> The ranges in the cascades and olympics maybe??? Also, the
> ALQ-99 support??? CVWP maybe??? You mentioned a "whole lot of other
> reasons", which there are many. I think the biggest competition on the
> west coast would be Lemoore of course, but I've heard about the noise
> complaints and lack of hangar space there. Yes, there are noise issues
> in Whidbey, I had to sign sort of a waiver when I bought my house
> there 10 years ago that I knew I was in a certain noise area.. But I
> know from experience here at the Lake and up at Whidbey, that the
> 400's are quieter than those 408 A/B's. It all depends which
> politico's go for it the most I suppose.
> I only hope from a logistics standpoint that they decide to
> base it on both coasts. As a prior Prowler MMCO, it is very painful
> and expensive to move 5 jets and 155 personnel plus all the support
> items necessary cross country every deck cert, TESTA 1/2, TESTA 3/4,
> COMPTUEX and JTFEX, just like the Tomcat guys have to do going east to
> west. And very expensive.
>
>
I think AlQ-99 support is pretty small potatos in the cost issue. None
of this will happen quickly so NUW will be around for awhile. I think
the issue will come down to training airspace. The Oly, Okanoagan and
Roosevelt MOA's and the Darrington Special Use airspace are simply not
available elswhere not to mention the IR and VR routes. If they don't
get used we will lose then and getting them back won't be an option.
The airspace at Fallon, Lemore, W-72, Key Weird and such are pretty
saturated let alone buildings, noise and all the other issues.

With regard to EMI and your comment about low band pods VAQ-35 did, in
fact, have two A/B band pods which went down into the low 200 MHZ range
and up to 1090MHZ IIRC. They were FIWC (aka FEWSG aka FTRG) assets and
were 0-3G limited and flared landings only. They were built on a low
band 99 pod and canoe and externally looked like every other low band
pod.

Pugs

Elmshoot

December 31st 03, 04:53 PM

Rick,
>ummmm yeah we can say EMI, and nothing will happen to the flight
>controls when you jam. What, did VAQ-35 have experimental jammers that
>jammed in the 60-400hz range?

I will admitt that 35 had some interesting developmental pods. That might have
operated in that range. I will refrain from any further technical discussion
since I think we might be in a beadwindow situation or as Pugs might say he
doesn't know what he is talking about, either way enuf said.

Remember? Jamming in the bandwidths and
>freqs we jam in has nothing to do with onboard avionics and flight
>control systems, otherwise every A/C in a current strike package would
>be affected?
Yes we used to fly in packages and set off other planes equipment.

Plus, extensive lab and flight testing is done before we
>field a system,,,,,what exactly are you getting at elmshoot?

Do you remember when the USAF had some F-16's fly into the ground while in the
close proximity to high power radio antennas. They aren't called lawn darts for
nothing.

Also,
>without going into detail, you are forgetting that there is such a
>thing as directional jamming?

Yes, my point still stands

OBTW, glad you are perpetuating the myth
>of Whidbey, I'll continue it,,,THE WEATHER THERE IS NASTY AND IT RAINS
>300 DAYS OUT OF THE YEAR!!! So stay away, do your best to NOT get
>stationed there!! ;)

Whidbey has a very mild climate much nicer winters than in the midwest were I
live now.
>
>On 31 Dec 2003 05:20:23 GMT, (Elmshoot) wrote:
>
>>>The next issue is why keep them at Whidbey (except for airspace and
>>>whole lot of other reasons not the least of which is Elk hunting and
>>>steelhead fishing) ;^
>>>
>>
>>Ah I remember it well. The VAQ-35 Ops Rod and Gun club. The wind would be
>>howling snow flurries coming down at an 85 degree angle. These knuckel heads
>>would show up at work. Get the 75 minutes of work that they would spend all
>day
>>doing done in about 60 minutes. And then ask if they could go out and lay
>in a
>>freshly harvested corn field and wait for a duck to fly over.....
>>At least the squadron picknic later that month was interesting when the
>>bachelors would show up with a meat dish. The Wives Club girls from the big
>>city would be scarfing down huge quanities of duck or some other animal of
>the
>>wild until they learned the truth. I though one or two was going to puke on
>the
>>spot.
>>
>>Back to the subject... What happens to the fly by wire jet when the master
>bad
>>is turned on? Can you say EMI?
>
>
>

Andrew Toppan

December 31st 03, 07:56 PM

On 31 Dec 2003 14:49:19 GMT, (Pechs1) wrote:

>Is the S-3 gone as a tanker?

That's basically all the S-3 does now.

Until it is retired without replacement sometime in the next few years.

>Is there any plan to convert some of these to permanent KS-3s(A good idea,

No.

--
Andrew Toppan --- --- "I speak only for myself"
"Haze Gray & Underway" - Naval History, DANFS, World Navies Today,
Photo Features, Military FAQs, and more - http://www.hazegray.org/

fudog50

December 31st 03, 08:01 PM

Talk about beadwindow! The mild climate is one of the best kept
secrets about Whidbey!!! Shhhhhh!!!

On 31 Dec 2003 16:53:51 GMT, (Elmshoot) wrote:

>Rick,
>>ummmm yeah we can say EMI, and nothing will happen to the flight
>>controls when you jam. What, did VAQ-35 have experimental jammers that
>>jammed in the 60-400hz range?
>
>I will admitt that 35 had some interesting developmental pods. That might have
>operated in that range. I will refrain from any further technical discussion
>since I think we might be in a beadwindow situation or as Pugs might say he
>doesn't know what he is talking about, either way enuf said.
>
>
> Remember? Jamming in the bandwidths and
>>freqs we jam in has nothing to do with onboard avionics and flight
>>control systems, otherwise every A/C in a current strike package would
>>be affected?
>Yes we used to fly in packages and set off other planes equipment.
>
> Plus, extensive lab and flight testing is done before we
>>field a system,,,,,what exactly are you getting at elmshoot?
>
> Do you remember when the USAF had some F-16's fly into the ground while in the
>close proximity to high power radio antennas. They aren't called lawn darts for
>nothing.
>
> Also,
>>without going into detail, you are forgetting that there is such a
>>thing as directional jamming?
>
>Yes, my point still stands
>
>OBTW, glad you are perpetuating the myth
>>of Whidbey, I'll continue it,,,THE WEATHER THERE IS NASTY AND IT RAINS
>>300 DAYS OUT OF THE YEAR!!! So stay away, do your best to NOT get
>>stationed there!! ;)
>
>Whidbey has a very mild climate much nicer winters than in the midwest were I
>live now.
>>
>>On 31 Dec 2003 05:20:23 GMT, (Elmshoot) wrote:
>>
>>>>The next issue is why keep them at Whidbey (except for airspace and
>>>>whole lot of other reasons not the least of which is Elk hunting and
>>>>steelhead fishing) ;^
>>>>
>>>
>>>Ah I remember it well. The VAQ-35 Ops Rod and Gun club. The wind would be
>>>howling snow flurries coming down at an 85 degree angle. These knuckel heads
>>>would show up at work. Get the 75 minutes of work that they would spend all
>>day
>>>doing done in about 60 minutes. And then ask if they could go out and lay
>>in a
>>>freshly harvested corn field and wait for a duck to fly over.....
>>>At least the squadron picknic later that month was interesting when the
>>>bachelors would show up with a meat dish. The Wives Club girls from the big
>>>city would be scarfing down huge quanities of duck or some other animal of
>>the
>>>wild until they learned the truth. I though one or two was going to puke on
>>the
>>>spot.
>>>
>>>Back to the subject... What happens to the fly by wire jet when the master
>>bad
>>>is turned on? Can you say EMI?
>>
>>
>>
>

fudog50

December 31st 03, 08:03 PM

Good comments Pugs,
However my kind of smart ass remarks about the 60-400Hz range had
nothing to do with lo-band jammers in the lower MHz range, maybe you
missed that, sorry.
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 11:33:12 -0500, Allen Epps
> wrote:

>In article >, fudog50
> wrote:
>
>> The ranges in the cascades and olympics maybe??? Also, the
>> ALQ-99 support??? CVWP maybe??? You mentioned a "whole lot of other
>> reasons", which there are many. I think the biggest competition on the
>> west coast would be Lemoore of course, but I've heard about the noise
>> complaints and lack of hangar space there. Yes, there are noise issues
>> in Whidbey, I had to sign sort of a waiver when I bought my house
>> there 10 years ago that I knew I was in a certain noise area.. But I
>> know from experience here at the Lake and up at Whidbey, that the
>> 400's are quieter than those 408 A/B's. It all depends which
>> politico's go for it the most I suppose.
>> I only hope from a logistics standpoint that they decide to
>> base it on both coasts. As a prior Prowler MMCO, it is very painful
>> and expensive to move 5 jets and 155 personnel plus all the support
>> items necessary cross country every deck cert, TESTA 1/2, TESTA 3/4,
>> COMPTUEX and JTFEX, just like the Tomcat guys have to do going east to
>> west. And very expensive.
>>
>>
>I think AlQ-99 support is pretty small potatos in the cost issue. None
>of this will happen quickly so NUW will be around for awhile. I think
>the issue will come down to training airspace. The Oly, Okanoagan and
>Roosevelt MOA's and the Darrington Special Use airspace are simply not
>available elswhere not to mention the IR and VR routes. If they don't
>get used we will lose then and getting them back won't be an option.
>The airspace at Fallon, Lemore, W-72, Key Weird and such are pretty
>saturated let alone buildings, noise and all the other issues.
>
>With regard to EMI and your comment about low band pods VAQ-35 did, in
>fact, have two A/B band pods which went down into the low 200 MHZ range
>and up to 1090MHZ IIRC. They were FIWC (aka FEWSG aka FTRG) assets and
>were 0-3G limited and flared landings only. They were built on a low
>band 99 pod and canoe and externally looked like every other low band
>pod.
>
>Pugs

fudog50

December 31st 03, 08:10 PM

Pechs,
About a month ago I raised the same issue in here and it was so rudely
(maybe not accurately) pointed out to me that the 'Rhino's are already
performing that role and had gone through DT/OT and everything using
that mission. I hadn't seen it yet, and talking to my shipmates here
in the Vampires, they hadn't used this profile yet. The S-3 is a
goner, (2005) no plans for long term tanker use, sadly. To me, this
will make our reliance on AF tankers more prevalent. We lose some of
our sef-sufficiency for sure, not sure what the trade-offs of having
Rhinos play tanker. I'm sure there still has to be something in the
air for every recovery, for blue water ops and that dreaded sip of
petrol before rigging the barricade.

But On 31 Dec 2003 14:49:19 GMT, (Pechs1) wrote:

>many-<< EF-18G built and flying? According to who? >> 
>
>But what about tankers? What do current airwings, populated by a bunch of
>'Bugs' use? Refueling packages on the wings of other Bugs??
>
>Is the S-3 gone as a tanker?
>
>Is there any plan to convert some of these to permanent KS-3s(A good idea,
>IMO)?
>P. C. Chisholm
>CDR, USN(ret.)
>Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer

Allen Epps

December 31st 03, 09:27 PM

In article >, fudog50
> wrote:

> Good comments Pugs,
> However my kind of smart ass remarks about the 60-400Hz range had
> nothing to do with lo-band jammers in the lower MHz range, maybe you
> missed that, sorry.
> On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 11:33:12 -0500, Allen Epps
> > wrote:
>
foo,
Sorry brain addled by work, I added an M to the Hz and synapses long
dormant snapped to life recalling the halceon days of doing the FIWC
thing before I registered sarcasm.
I just saw my my "Tan, Drink, Fly" patch from VAQ-35 with an
embroidered Prowler front end with fishing rods, skies and golf bags
stuffed in the back. I was in 35 for 19 months before going TAR as the
squadron was closing down and in that time went on 27 detachments. Got
a hell of a lot more flight time than most of the fleet Prowler guys in
the 93 timeframe. I had four months in a row with more than 60 hours a
month, of course I was also the Scheds "O" :) We had 11 airframes (2
were dead birds) and maint could often get 6 flyable with five crews in
the squadorn. Everyone was second tour Prowlers at least until the
women and a couple other guys came aboard so tons of experience and a
bunch of good folks.
Pugs

December 31st 03, 11:05 PM

Noise complaints here at Lemoore? Who would be making those complaints? The cows?

fudog50 > wrote in message >...
> The ranges in the cascades and olympics maybe??? Also, the
> ALQ-99 support??? CVWP maybe??? You mentioned a "whole lot of other
> reasons", which there are many. I think the biggest competition on the
> west coast would be Lemoore of course, but I've heard about the noise
> complaints and lack of hangar space there. Yes, there are noise issues
> in Whidbey, I had to sign sort of a waiver when I bought my house
> there 10 years ago that I knew I was in a certain noise area.. But I
> know from experience here at the Lake and up at Whidbey, that the
> 400's are quieter than those 408 A/B's. It all depends which
> politico's go for it the most I suppose.
> I only hope from a logistics standpoint that they decide to
> base it on both coasts. As a prior Prowler MMCO, it is very painful
> and expensive to move 5 jets and 155 personnel plus all the support
> items necessary cross country every deck cert, TESTA 1/2, TESTA 3/4,
> COMPTUEX and JTFEX, just like the Tomcat guys have to do going east to
> west. And very expensive.
>
> On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 19:45:34 -0500, Allen Epps
> > wrote:
>
> >In article >, Andrew Toppan
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 21:31:01 -0800, "Yofuri" > wrote:
> >>
> >> >Old news; already built and flying. Looking for a job?
> >>
> >> EF-18G built and flying? According to who? The Navy apparently doesn't think
> >> so, or they wouldn't have awarded a large contract to develop the aircraft.
> >>
> >> F/A-18E/F is "built and flying". EF-18G has been under discussion and
> >> preliminary development for some time, so the contract is no surprise.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Andrew Toppan --- --- "I speak only for myself"
> >> "Haze Gray & Underway" - Naval History, DANFS, World Navies Today,
> >> Photo Features, Military FAQs, and more - http://www.hazegray.org/
> >>
> >The F airframe has been fitted and flown with the the ALQ-99 pods which
> >will used as exiting as GFE or Government Furnished Equipment for the
> >project. The ESM pods on the wingtips have been flown and have gone
> >through extensive integration work. The simulator and avionics
> >integration work has been going on for at least 7 years as I flew the
> >sim in St Louis back in the 96 timeframe. It's evolved nicely and I
> >flew the more recent verion on a roadshow at Andrews last year. All in
> >all Boeing/Mcair as put a lot of their own money into this project
> >over the last little bit knowing the Navy would figure out the Prowler
> >was going to die much quicker than the projected. I would regard the
> >technology as low risk, the question will be more who gives up a slot
> >for E/F production if the Navy decides they want the airframes sooner
> >than 09.
> >The next issue is why keep them at Whidbey (except for airspace and
> >whole lot of other reasons not the least of which is Elk hunting and
> >steelhead fishing) ;^
> >
> >Pugs

Doug \Woody\ and Erin Beal

December 31st 03, 11:39 PM

On 12/31/03 8:49 AM, in article
, "Pechs1" >
wrote:

> many-<< EF-18G built and flying? According to who? >> 
>
> But what about tankers? What do current airwings, populated by a bunch of
> 'Bugs' use? Refueling packages on the wings of other Bugs??
>
> Is the S-3 gone as a tanker?
>
> Is there any plan to convert some of these to permanent KS-3s(A good idea,
> IMO)?
> P. C. Chisholm
> CDR, USN(ret.)
> Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer

Soon gone.

F/A-18E/F will be the only tanker left. Scary.

Doug \Woody\ and Erin Beal

December 31st 03, 11:43 PM

On 12/31/03 9:54 AM, in article , "Mike
Kanze" > wrote:

> Back in the early 1970s when the Prowler was hitting the fleet, the question
> in FITRON Ready Rooms was, "How much gas can it give?"
>
> Plus ça change!

It was an O-level mod to plumb the Prowler for a buddy store. One of our
CPO's at The Lake was proposing it to the fleet as the Intruder was
retiring, but the proposal didn't make it far.

The community stiff-armed it because the jet only had so many stations for
pylons and you either carry pods or tanks. With the (then and current)
Prowler shortage, ALQ-99 seemed more important.

--Woody

Doug \Woody\ and Erin Beal

December 31st 03, 11:44 PM

On 12/31/03 1:56 PM, in article ,
"Andrew Toppan" > wrote:

> On 31 Dec 2003 14:49:19 GMT, (Pechs1) wrote:
>
>> Is the S-3 gone as a tanker?
>
> That's basically all the S-3 does now.
>
> Until it is retired without replacement sometime in the next few years.
>
>> Is there any plan to convert some of these to permanent KS-3s(A good idea,
>
> No.
>
> --
> Andrew Toppan --- --- "I speak only for myself"
> "Haze Gray & Underway" - Naval History, DANFS, World Navies Today,
> Photo Features, Military FAQs, and more - http://www.hazegray.org/
>

What's the replacement for the S-3? CSA got cancelled years ago.

Thomas Schoene

December 31st 03, 11:51 PM

Doug "Woody" and Erin Beal wrote:

> What's the replacement for the S-3? CSA got cancelled years ago.

For ASW, MH-60Rs and prayer, mainly. For everything else, land-based air
and the Super Bug.

--
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing
special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed)

Ogden Johnson III

January 1st 04, 12:12 AM

fudog50 > wrote:

>Unsat J,
> Thanks to O.J for pasting the link, (which says absolutely
>nothing about the questions I asked), so go "JEEZ" yourself for cryin
>out loud! Do you even know what DT/OT and IOC are? I'll leave it at
>that.

I can guarantee you he does. I can also guarantee you that you are
displaying your own ignorance by asking:

>>> Any details on the contract? How about the SOW? I'd be interested to
>>> see it, along with the milestones and when DT/OT/IOC is supposed to
>>> take place.

when the source was clearly identified as a newspaper article. I've
been playing around the DoD world, either in the military or working
for them via a beltway bandit, since 1961 and I've *never* seen
information about a contract's SOW, milestones, DT/OT/IOC, etc.,
published in a newspaper article. Or in a website article. Or in a
magazine article. I generally see snippets of info on that sort of
thing in the presentations put out by the Program Office's or
Manufacturer/Prime Contractor's Power Point Rangers.

Maybe you want to try an FOI request with DoN for the info you are
seeking.
--
OJ III
[Email sent to Yahoo addy is burned before reading.
Lower and crunch the sig and you'll net me at comcast]

Susan VanCamp

January 1st 04, 02:03 AM

Yeah, what's the Fleet coming to when VFA guys return from the first combat
deployment of their latest and greatest killing machine and brag about what
a great tanker it is...

"Doug "Woody" and Erin Beal" > wrote in message
...
> On 12/31/03 8:49 AM, in article
> , "Pechs1" >
> wrote:
>
> > many-<< EF-18G built and flying? According to who? >> 
> >
> > But what about tankers? What do current airwings, populated by a bunch
of
> > 'Bugs' use? Refueling packages on the wings of other Bugs??
> >
> > Is the S-3 gone as a tanker?
> >
> > Is there any plan to convert some of these to permanent KS-3s(A good
idea,
> > IMO)?
> > P. C. Chisholm
> > CDR, USN(ret.)
> > Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye
Phlyer
>
> Soon gone.
>
> F/A-18E/F will be the only tanker left. Scary.
>

fudog50

January 1st 04, 09:35 AM

Hey OJ
Sorry if I ruffled your feathers, I'm confused. I asked a question to
the group, not just him about any other details the group might have
other than the news article, because I would be truly interested. Then
all I get is flack, like I'm a dumbass for asking. First 'J' responded
with " JEEZ, its a news article". I knew that it was just a news
article, thats why I told him to go Jeez hisself when he attacked my
question to the group, and I guess you meant that to be for you? it
wasn't.
And yes I know about being PP to death, I have a "few" on MMA
and ACS/EP3, thats why I asked if anyone had any info on it. I also
work for a PMA. Guess I asked for too much. Shoulda known better, but
I'm not ignorant.

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 19:12:07 -0500, Ogden Johnson III
> wrote:

>fudog50 > wrote:
>
>>Unsat J,
>> Thanks to O.J for pasting the link, (which says absolutely
>>nothing about the questions I asked), so go "JEEZ" yourself for cryin
>>out loud! Do you even know what DT/OT and IOC are? I'll leave it at
>>that.
>
>I can guarantee you he does. I can also guarantee you that you are
>displaying your own ignorance by asking:
>
>>>> Any details on the contract? How about the SOW? I'd be interested to
>>>> see it, along with the milestones and when DT/OT/IOC is supposed to
>>>> take place.
>
>when the source was clearly identified as a newspaper article. I've
>been playing around the DoD world, either in the military or working
>for them via a beltway bandit, since 1961 and I've *never* seen
>information about a contract's SOW, milestones, DT/OT/IOC, etc.,
>published in a newspaper article. Or in a website article. Or in a
>magazine article. I generally see snippets of info on that sort of
>thing in the presentations put out by the Program Office's or
>Manufacturer/Prime Contractor's Power Point Rangers.
>
>Maybe you want to try an FOI request with DoN for the info you are
>seeking.

Thomas Schoene

January 1st 04, 02:40 PM

Ogden Johnson III wrote:

> when the source was clearly identified as a newspaper article. I've
> been playing around the DoD world, either in the military or working
> for them via a beltway bandit, since 1961 and I've *never* seen
> information about a contract's SOW, milestones, DT/OT/IOC, etc.,
> published in a newspaper article. Or in a website article. Or in a
> magazine article. I generally see snippets of info on that sort of
> thing in the presentations put out by the Program Office's or
> Manufacturer/Prime Contractor's Power Point Rangers.

I think maybe you're not reading the right magazines, then. The serious
trade press (Defense Daily, Aerospace Daily, Inside the Pentagon, etc.) will
often discuss milestones, DT/OT, IOC dates, and so forth. A lot of this
info will even show up in slightly less hard-core pubs like Aviation Week
and Defense News.

For EA-18, we can even find this info online in pubs like Seapower (not
usually a great refernce, but a good start in this case). From mid 2002:

"The company estimates that the aircraft's Systems Design and Development
phase could begin in fiscal year 2004, with initial operational capability
reached in 2009. "

http://www.navyleague.org/sea_power/june_02_08.php

The EA-18G did in fact pass Milestone B (Approaval to begin System Design
and Development) late in 2003 and Boeing received a contract for EA-18G SDD
on the 29th (which is what prompted this thread).

--
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing
special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed)

Pechs1

January 1st 04, 02:53 PM

Doug-<< It was an O-level mod to plumb the Prowler for a buddy store.
>> 

In VF-151, Fox " have ya seen my moovie' Farrell hung a buddy store on the CL
of our F-4 with wing tanks, and then refueled another F-4, got a pic of it but
can't find it.

The give was just about nuthin but we did for a airshow.
P. C. Chisholm
CDR, USN(ret.)
Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer

Pechs1

January 1st 04, 02:56 PM

andrew-<< Until it is retired without replacement sometime in the next few
years.

>Is there any plan to convert some of these to permanent KS-3s(A good idea,

No. >> 

Too bad. Altho I am not a VS guy, there are butt loads of Chinese 'U boats'
that will be an 'issue' in the future, IMO. Do the Blackhawks onboard the CVs
have a antisub mission?

Plus flyin' KS-3s offa the boat would be a great 'retirement' job...
P. C. Chisholm
CDR, USN(ret.)
Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer

Thomas Schoene

January 1st 04, 03:03 PM

Pechs1 wrote:

> Too bad. Altho I am not a VS guy, there are butt loads of Chinese 'U
> boats' that will be an 'issue' in the future, IMO. Do the Blackhawks
> onboard the CVs have a antisub mission?

Seahawks, not Blackhawks, and yes, ASW is the main job for the SH-60F (well,
when they're not doing VERTREP or Plane Guard). But there are only four or
six per carrier.

--
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing
special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed)

Ogden Johnson III

January 1st 04, 05:54 PM

"Thomas Schoene" > wrote:

>Ogden Johnson III wrote:
>
>> when the source was clearly identified as a newspaper article. I've
>> been playing around the DoD world, either in the military or working
>> for them via a beltway bandit, since 1961 and I've *never* seen
>> information about a contract's SOW, milestones, DT/OT/IOC, etc.,
>> published in a newspaper article. Or in a website article. Or in a
>> magazine article. I generally see snippets of info on that sort of
>> thing in the presentations put out by the Program Office's or
>> Manufacturer/Prime Contractor's Power Point Rangers.

>I think maybe you're not reading the right magazines, then. The serious
>trade press (Defense Daily, Aerospace Daily, Inside the Pentagon, etc.) will
>often discuss milestones, DT/OT, IOC dates, and so forth. A lot of this
>info will even show up in slightly less hard-core pubs like Aviation Week
>and Defense News.

Fair bust, Tom. I *was* remiss in not being specific, in that I meant
general interest magazines rather than the "trade" press. Gomenasai,
boy-san.
--
OJ III
[Email sent to Yahoo addy is burned before reading.
Lower and crunch the sig and you'll net me at comcast]

fudog50

January 1st 04, 06:30 PM

Thanks Tom

On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 14:40:21 GMT, "Thomas Schoene"
> wrote:

>Ogden Johnson III wrote:
>
>> when the source was clearly identified as a newspaper article. I've
>> been playing around the DoD world, either in the military or working
>> for them via a beltway bandit, since 1961 and I've *never* seen
>> information about a contract's SOW, milestones, DT/OT/IOC, etc.,
>> published in a newspaper article. Or in a website article. Or in a
>> magazine article. I generally see snippets of info on that sort of
>> thing in the presentations put out by the Program Office's or
>> Manufacturer/Prime Contractor's Power Point Rangers.
>
>I think maybe you're not reading the right magazines, then. The serious
>trade press (Defense Daily, Aerospace Daily, Inside the Pentagon, etc.) will
>often discuss milestones, DT/OT, IOC dates, and so forth. A lot of this
>info will even show up in slightly less hard-core pubs like Aviation Week
>and Defense News.
>
>For EA-18, we can even find this info online in pubs like Seapower (not
>usually a great refernce, but a good start in this case). From mid 2002:
>
>"The company estimates that the aircraft's Systems Design and Development
>phase could begin in fiscal year 2004, with initial operational capability
>reached in 2009. "
>
>http://www.navyleague.org/sea_power/june_02_08.php
>
>The EA-18G did in fact pass Milestone B (Approaval to begin System Design
>and Development) late in 2003 and Boeing received a contract for EA-18G SDD
>on the 29th (which is what prompted this thread).

Andrew Toppan

January 1st 04, 06:51 PM

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 23:44:24 GMT, "Doug \"Woody\" and Erin Beal"
> wrote:

>What's the replacement for the S-3? CSA got cancelled years ago.

Notice that I said "Until it is retired without replacement sometime in the
next few years."

"Without replacement" means NO replacement.

--
Andrew Toppan --- --- "I speak only for myself"
"Haze Gray & Underway" - Naval History, DANFS, World Navies Today,
Photo Features, Military FAQs, and more - http://www.hazegray.org/

Andrew Toppan

January 1st 04, 06:51 PM

On 01 Jan 2004 14:56:18 GMT, (Pechs1) wrote:

>that will be an 'issue' in the future, IMO. Do the Blackhawks onboard the CVs
>have a antisub mission?

There are no Blackhawks aboard CVs.

There are Seahawks, however, and their primary function is ASW.

--
Andrew Toppan --- --- "I speak only for myself"
"Haze Gray & Underway" - Naval History, DANFS, World Navies Today,
Photo Features, Military FAQs, and more - http://www.hazegray.org/

Mike Kanze

January 1st 04, 07:02 PM

Once again proving that sometimes it's right to do something, if only to
show what a lousy idea it was in the first place. <g>

Happy New Year to all in r.a.m.n!

--
Mike Kanze

" . . . Greed powers the capitalist impulse as gasoline powers the
combustion engine, and, like gasoline, has noxious properties that must be
monitored."

- Julia Homer, Editor-in-Chief - CFO Magazine, December 2003

"Pechs1" > wrote in message
...
> Doug-<< It was an O-level mod to plumb the Prowler for a buddy store.
> >> 
>
> In VF-151, Fox " have ya seen my moovie' Farrell hung a buddy store on the
CL
> of our F-4 with wing tanks, and then refueled another F-4, got a pic of it
but
> can't find it.
>
> The give was just about nuthin but we did for a airshow.
> P. C. Chisholm
> CDR, USN(ret.)
> Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye
Phlyer

John R Weiss

January 1st 04, 07:23 PM

"Pechs1" > wrote...
>
> In VF-151, Fox " have ya seen my moovie' Farrell hung a buddy store on the CL
> of our F-4 with wing tanks, and then refueled another F-4, got a pic of it but
> can't find it.
>
> The give was just about nuthin but we did for a airshow.

Ah, the things we used to be able to do for fun on the ol' Mudway...

I also seem to remember a LONG string of alleged "100% FMC" reports from VF-161
(IIRC)...

sid

January 1st 04, 09:00 PM

"Thomas Schoene" > wrote in message .net>...
> Doug "Woody" and Erin Beal wrote:
>
> > What's the replacement for the S-3? CSA got cancelled years ago.
>
> For ASW, MH-60Rs and prayer, mainly. For everything else, land-based air
> and the Super Bug.

Don't tell Fred McCall that carriers will be beholden to land based
air. If you do you will join the legions that have been Plonked By
Fred ;)

Doug \Woody\ and Erin Beal

January 2nd 04, 12:17 PM

On 1/1/04 9:03 AM, in article
.net, "Thomas Schoene"
> wrote:

> Pechs1 wrote:
>
>> Too bad. Altho I am not a VS guy, there are butt loads of Chinese 'U
>> boats' that will be an 'issue' in the future, IMO. Do the Blackhawks
>> onboard the CVs have a antisub mission?
>
> Seahawks, not Blackhawks, and yes, ASW is the main job for the SH-60F (well,
> when they're not doing VERTREP or Plane Guard). But there are only four or
> six per carrier.
>
> --
> Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
> "If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing
> special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed)
>

I know that it's probably been explained here before, but...

Somebody wanna go over the realignment of the HS and HSL communities? That
is, conversion of SH-60B and HH-60H to SH-60S and R's and what each helo's
mission will be?

--Woody

Doug \Woody\ and Erin Beal

January 2nd 04, 12:19 PM

On 1/1/04 12:51 PM, in article ,
"Andrew Toppan" > wrote:

> On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 23:44:24 GMT, "Doug \"Woody\" and Erin Beal"
> > wrote:
>
>> What's the replacement for the S-3? CSA got cancelled years ago.
>
> Notice that I said "Until it is retired without replacement sometime in the
> next few years."
>
> "Without replacement" means NO replacement.
>
> --
> Andrew Toppan --- --- "I speak only for myself"
> "Haze Gray & Underway" - Naval History, DANFS, World Navies Today,
> Photo Features, Military FAQs, and more - http://www.hazegray.org/
>
>

Many years of reading under my belt... Still have reading comprehension
issues.

--Woody

Thomas Schoene

January 2nd 04, 02:19 PM

Doug "Woody" and Erin Beal wrote:

> Somebody wanna go over the realignment of the HS and HSL
> communities? That is, conversion of SH-60B and HH-60H
> to SH-60S and R's and what each helo's mission will be?

Sure.

Hardware first. The plan is to reduce the four current types of battlegroup
helos -- SH-60B in the escorts, SH-60F and HH-60H on the carriers, and
CH-46s in the logistics ships -- to two types -- the MH-60R (formerly
SH-60R) and the MH-60S (formerly CH-60S).

The MH-60R will replace both types of SH-60; it will do ASW, SUW, and
VERTREP. It's basically an improved LAMPS-type helo with dipping sonar so it
can operate around the carrier as well as in the screen.

The MH-60S will replace the HH-60H and CH-46; it will do VERTREP, SUW,
SAR/CSAR, and SOF support. The MH-60S is also supposed to be taking over
the AMCM and VOD missions from the MH-53, but they seem to be backing away
from that a bit in the last few months. (Yes, the MH-60S does look way
over-tasked to me, even without AMCM to deal with.)

All of these helos will be new builds. Plans to convert old H-60s (B, F and
H) to MH-60Rs were dropped a couple of years ago when this turned out to be
more expensive in terms of lifecycle costing than just buying new helos.
The MH-60S has always been new construction, since it's got a larger
interior and different structure than the existing Seahawks.

Now the community re-organization. I understand that the plan is for each
battlegroup to have two helo squadrons -- one HSM (formerly HS or HSL) and
one HSC (formerly HC). The HSM squadron will operate MH-60Rs; it will be
reponsible for ASW helos on both the carrier and the escorts. The HSC
squadron will operate the MH-60Ss; again reponsible for helos on both the
carrier and the supporting logistics ships.

There will also be a few HSMs and HSCs operating more like the current HSLs,
sending out "expeditionary" detachments with the smaller surface groups.

The realignment is discussed in this Sea Power article. I'm slightly
skeptical about their breakout of the squadron designations, but the rest
looks the same as I remember from Proceedings.

http://www.navyleague.org/sea_power/nov_03_33.php

--
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing
special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed)

Mike Kanze

January 2nd 04, 03:27 PM

>Ah, the things we used to be able to do for fun on the ol' Mudway...

MIDWAY departed the Port of Oakland under tow on New Year's Eve, bound for
San Diego to complete her conversion to a museum ship. She had been
undergoing some heavy refurbishment at a local yard to prepare her for her
new life.

--
Mike Kanze

" . . . Greed powers the capitalist impulse as gasoline powers the
combustion engine, and, like gasoline, has noxious properties that must be
monitored."

- Julia Homer, Editor-in-Chief - CFO Magazine, December 2003

"John R Weiss" > wrote in message
news:it_Ib.252294$_M.1147212@attbi_s54...
> "Pechs1" > wrote...
> >
> > In VF-151, Fox " have ya seen my moovie' Farrell hung a buddy store on
the CL
> > of our F-4 with wing tanks, and then refueled another F-4, got a pic of
it but
> > can't find it.
> >
> > The give was just about nuthin but we did for a airshow.
>
> Ah, the things we used to be able to do for fun on the ol' Mudway...
>
> I also seem to remember a LONG string of alleged "100% FMC" reports from
VF-161
> (IIRC)...
>