TA4G Approach to HMAS Melbourne in 1970s (simulated because the deck is FOUL with an A4G on the catapult, which is inside the Foul Deck painted line). Also the TA4G was not able to land, 'touch and go' or arrest Navy News 08 June 1973 08 Apr 1985 No.9 A4G OFS mid 1973 VC-724 Sqdn NAS Nowra Click here to return to OFS page Dave Ramsay wrote the Sea Harrier report compar- ing A4G & SHAR Douglas A-4 badge awarded on A4G OFS first solo. RAN Maintainers wore this cotton badge also, similar situation in RNZAF as well. Scooter Driver badge from USofA, common there in the 1970s. RAN A4G Skyhawk pilots also usually kept the The Professionals Preference tag as shown here. 07 June 1974 edition Photo by John Bartels HMAS Creswell RANC c.1975 HMAS Melbourne is operating inside Jervis Bay in strong West to North-Westerly winds Click the red rectangle for a zoom view of NAS Nowra airfield today NAS Nowra, NSW area with Jervis Bay to the south-east HMAS Creswell RAN College Jervis Bay NAS Nowra Click above A4G approach video clip Jump to complete logbook (inside this PDF) here OR Separate PDF down- load from here: https://sky drive.live. com/ ? cid=cbcd63d6340707 e6&sa=761824345&wa =wsignin1.0&ppud=4# 49Mb Woven shoulder patches from: (L) Sea Venom & (R) Skyhawk eras The 805 Squadron Crest depicts blue and white waves representing navy, sea and heraldic principles. The orange represents the desert of Libya, with the Palm Trees representing the native trees of the Libyan area. The motto Over Sea and Sand alludes to the areas flown over by the squadron in World War II. Patch today Over Sea and Sand VC-724 Line Book Page 1975 http://www.abpic.co.uk/popup.php?q=1063529 Photo by Ray Barber Greenham Common, UK, 1977 Leut B. Hamilton AEO Incognito Leut Dave Ram- say? AWI Leut Jack Mayfield AWI Leut John Siebert LSO Leut Shep Shepherd Leut Jerry Pike USN Leut B. Rowe WEO or ALO Lcdr Barrie Daly SP Leut Nev Froggy French LSO Lcdr Barry Diamond CO Leut Andy Sinclair (perennial duty boy) Wardroom Club 21 HMAS Melbourne 77? It looks like the ever modest Engineers want to remain incognito even on their own linebook page for VF-805 in 1977 :-) http://www.dhc-2.com/N-13-886_154907_A-4_RAN_1280a.jpg Image by Robert A. Edwards http://www.dhc-2.com/RAAF-RAN-NZAF.html Greenham Common Arrival June 1977? Photo via Dave Ramsay Leut David Ramsay, Greenham Common, UK 1977 Click pic H Greenham Common Demo flown by Leut Dave Ramsay Greenham Common, UK, 1977 Photo by M. West http://www.abpic.co.uk/images/images/1001711F.jpg - Leut David Ramsay with VF-805 Squadron Line Crew, Greenham Common, UK June 1977 Click above for video clip International Air Tattoo 1977 RIAT Greenham Common, UK, June 1977 Greenham Common: ...a practice day followed by two display days. My other remaining memories are being involv- ed in the decision on how to configure the aircraft. We decided that a clean A4 still couldn't compete in a high per- formance show against the F14/15/16s that would be there so we went for the biggest things we could load 886 with. The routine was always going to be a flat one, partly because of the possibility of poor vis. It consisted of a depart- ure to a holding point then high speed run in and one or two turns over the top then the low speed pass with every- thing out. The camera man got pretty much all of it except the landing which I think followed another high speed pass & break downwind. I don't remember any problems with visibility although the film makes it look pretty murky. http://www.rob.clubkawasaki.com/jas1067.jpg Greenham Common, UK 1977 http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0553768/L/ Photo by Martin Stephen Navy News 29 July 1977 Navy News 29 July 1977 http://www.airliners.net/photo/Australia---Navy/McDonnell-Douglas-A-4G/1659605/L/&sid=503ee75e0d0f68ebffc8a3d45242a237 Greenham Common; UK June 1977 Photo by Fred Willemsen International Air Tattoo Dave Ramsay Preflights Sea Harrier. Screenshot taken about 7 minutes and twenty seconds in this 10 min- ute long documen- tary about the Harrier: http://www. youtube. com/watch? v=thxw BlJO8UU Title: Harrier 3/4 A Skyhawk Pilots Guide to the Sea Harrier (written by LCDR David Ramsay RAN in 1981) Introduction Like the RANs Skyhawk, the Sea Harrier is a successful ground attack aircraft employed in a primary role of Fleet Air Defence. There are many similarities between the two aircraft that make a direct comparison possible. This description of the Sea Harrier should facilitate an understanding of the aircraft that might well replace the Skyhawk. Size, Shape and Weight It is not easy to mistake an A4 for a Sea Harrier or vice versa. The aircraft are physically dissimilar in appearance but overall dimensions are comparable. Sea Harrier is 47 7 long with a 25 3 wingspan. The undercarriage arrangement of centreline mainwheels and wingtip outriggers is necessitated by the engine and nozzle positions. The outriggers are rather like the A4 nosewheel; they look spindly and vulnerable and bend horribly when landing with drift on, but they are remarkably rugged. Because only the centreline mainwheels have brakes the nose- wheel steering is an important asset for taxiing. The cockpit is higher than on the A4 and between very much larger intakes; rearward visibility is excellent. Cockpit size is much the same in both aircraft small. Sea Harrier has the same layout for its 5 store pylons; the out- boards carry stores up to the 3,000 lb ferry tanks and are plumbed for fuel but not wired for Sidewinders. The centreline pylon takes a 1,000 lb bomb but is not plumbed for fuel. Guns attach in pods on the underside of the fuselage, either side of the centreline pylon. The 30 mm Aden guns are heavier and impose a higher drag penalty than the A4 installation but they are more reliable, hit harder and improve VSTOL and slow speed ACM (Air Combat Manoeuvring) performance. The rate of re is the same but each gun can be red individually max ammo load is 130 rounds/gun. 2 The Sea Harriers basic weight is heavier than an A4 at 13,300 lbs with 5 pylons but so is the max AUW at 26,200 lbs. Internal fuel capacity is similar at 5,000 lbs (2,800 wing & 2,200 fuselage). There are only 800lb drop tanks available in the RN or RAF inventory for operational use they weigh 205 lbs per pair and impose no IAS, MACH or handling limitations. The long range ferry tanks contain 2,600 lbs, weigh 350 lbs each and impose tactically unacceptable handling limitations so they are used for transit ights only. By way of a summary here is a breakdown of each aircraft in its Air Defence conguration. Sea Harrier Skyhawk Basic weight 13,250 with 5 pylons 10,700 with 5 pylons Pilot 200 200 External Fuel tanks 205 2x800 lbs DTs inboard 136 1xB tank C/L Guns 919 including 2x130x30mm 433 including 2x100x20mm Launchers 227 2xLAU7 adapters 444 4xLAU 7a Missiles 370 2xAim 9L 740 4x Aim 9B Fuel int/ext 5,000/1600 + 500 H 2 O = 6,600 5,800/1000 = 6,300 22,271 at start up 18,953 at start up Hydraulic Services The hydraulic services are quite similar: No.1 Hydraulic system does everything while No.2 does the ying controls. The rudder is not powered and no facility exists to disconnect the hydraulic jacks in the event of a failure of both systems. A Ram Air Turbine (RAT) operates automatically if No.2 system fails and will get you home as long as uid loss was not the problem! The main utility services are: a. Flaps 3 position up, mid or down. b. Gear Blown down by 3,000 psi N 2 if Hyd No.1 fails. c. Airbrakes Little thing behind main oleo. d. NWS important so has an accumulator. e. Brakes also have an accumulator and hold on type park brake. Anti-skid is tted. 3 f. Autostabs each of the three axis autostabs is hydraulic- ally powered and operates (below 250 Kts) just like A4 stabaug dampening excursions. Only used in VSTOL. g. Autopilot not yet tted but will work through the autostab jacks with consequent limited authority. Will be similar to A4 in capability. There has never been a double hydraulic failure in the Harrier eet so the RAT has not saved anyone in fact it is the source of most of the hydraulic snags in the aircraft by virtue of the sequencing and priority valves which decide when it should come out. Even with the RAT working the Sea Harrier is not recoverable aboard ship with a double HYD failure (130Kts to drive it) so there is a move afoot to delete the RAT entirely. Electrical Systems The Sea Harrier has a 12Kva alternator which runs the AC services and, through a Transformer Rectier Unit (TRU), the DC services including charging the 2 batteries. In addition the GTS/APU has a 6Kva alternator and it will work in the air should you be in danger of attening the batteries before you can recover after a main alter- nator failure. Clearly there is not much comparison with the A4 system. The Cockpit The Sea Harrier cockpit is similar in size to that in the A4. It is accessed from the right via a neat little ladder and the canopy opens by sliding rearwards on rails. The ejection seat is the latest Martin Baker Mk10, it is comfortable and easier to strap in to than a Macchi because of the combined harness which requires only two tongues to be inserted into the QRB (Quick Release Box). The pins are reduced to two seat pan ring handle and Miniature Detonating Cord (MDC) there is no face blind ring handle. The seat goes through the canopy which is shattered by the MDC as the seat is initiated. The MDC can also be red as a means of emergency egress on the ground. 4 Once seated in the cockpit the A4 pilot would nd the layout similar but a little more cluttered than in the Skyhawk. The throttle has an erect grip instead of a T-bar and beside it is the Nozzle lever a single lever which, combined with the nozzle angle indicator and the nozzle stop device, is all that sets this cockpit apart from any other single seat cockpit. The nozzle stop is a spring loaded device used to facilitate preselecting a nozzle angle for takeoff so you dont have to look down. The panels down both sides of the seat are about as wide as in the A4 but do not go as far aft. There is also a smaller shelf above and extending partially over the main consoles. Looking ahead, the reector glass of the HUD is much larger than the A4 gunsight; so is the unit itself which thus absorbs quite a lot of space in the top centre portion of the instrument panel. The glare shield is very similar to the A4 panel. The glare shield is very similar to the A4 with warning lights arranged all along the underside of it. The Sea Harrier has red primary warnings on the left glare shield (Fire AC or DC fail and other such nasties) and amber secondary warnings on the right. Grouped with the secondaries are some blue status lights advising things like airbrake out, NWS on, CAM running, APU online, etc. The instrument panel layout is pretty conventional: Flight instruments at centre but low because of the large HUD. Radar video screen on the right. Engine instruments left. The main Weapons Control Panel is below the left instrument panel with a few more behind the control stick below the centre panel. The British philosophy is a little different to the American system of armament switchology. Function, fuzing and pylon selection is much the same as in the Skyhawk, but the Arm Master is a rotary switch made just prior to TakeOff and nal safety is provided by a safety catch over the trigger and a ap over the bomb button. At the bottom edge of the left glare shield is the array of switches for the HUD and also the radar controls. In a similar position on the right are 3 switches for the cameras and an autopilot authority gauge. 5 The Engine There are not many similarities between the Pegasus 104 and the J52 P8A. What is much the same is the way the pilot can throttle bash with relative freedom from compressor stalls. The ight test schedule includes slams from idle to full power at 40,000 feet at an almost unattainable 18 units AOA (angle of attack) [8 units is optimum]. Slam performance is critical to takeoffs particularly for the RAF off short dirt strips and for the RN off ight decks. The Pegasus accelerates from ground idle (2527% LP RPM) to 55% in 34.5 secs and from 55%100% in 2.22.8 secs. The engine is twin spool like the J52 but spools contrarotate to nullify gyroscopic effects on hover manoeuvrability. The engine has a manual fuel system which is selectable by a guarded hard-to-reach switch. Primary fuel control is rather complicated. Basically the engine has three controllers in addition to your left hand. The RPM you attempt to select by pushing the throttle to the wall is governed by the LP Mechanical Governor (all same Macchi). The JPT resulting from your RPM setting is governed by a JPT limiter which reduces fuel and therefore RPM to keep within limits (max 13% authority). Finally a pressure ratio limiter acts to cut back full power RPM above 10,000 feet to prevent engine surge due to compressor blade tip stalling. Pretty simple eh? Wait for it. The engine also has a water injection system which when you select it ON sprays the turbine blades, effectively reducing JPT by 30C. You can promptly put it back up again by increasing RPM because the LP Mech Governor redatums when the water switch is made from 103.5% to 107% LP RPM. At the same time the JPT limit redatums from 715 to 745C so you effectively get an extra 60C with water owing. Nozzles aft conventional ight JPT limit is 610C. What does all this (remember that was the simple explanation) mean to the pilot? Well Take off is simple. Obviously gear is down and you are looking at the Short Lift Ratings of 103.5% or 107% depending on whether you use water. Whatever you choose 6 you slam from 55%, release the brakes, unscramble your brain and pull in the preselected nozzle angle at the precalculated speed (or as you exit the ski-jump ramp). Those with the capacity to observe such things will have seen the RPM hit the appropriate gure within the advertised 2.22.8 second band and will then observe the JPT rising as the engine heat soaks. While you are nozzling away to wingborne ight you will observe the 15 second light on the secondary warning panel illuminate; it tells you that the JPT is passing 700 dry or 715 if water is ON and indicates that the limiters will act soon to maintain 715/745. But by this time you are wingborne, nozzles aft, water off, gear travelling and the JPT limiter is redatumed to 610 anyway. Without you moving the throttle from the wall where you left it, the RPM will be back at the book limit of 95.5% because of the JPTL action. The Harrier is probably the worlds fastest aircraft off the mark up to 400 Kts, by which time the F15s or 16s would be cruising on by. However the advantage taken of heat soaking time in take off situations is no use for hovering and so vertical landings require you to have sustainable power in hand. Hover performance is dependant on OAT and pressure, and varies from engine to engine. The planning graph gives everything on one page with correction factors for engines which are better or worse than the mean. Before ying you calculate the fuel weight at which you expect to be able to bring your a/c to a dry power hover at 670C JPT. This gives a 45 margin below the limit for the JPT rise caused by the bleed air demands of the ight controls. If you require to land above dry hover weight then wet hovers are planned by the same method for 695C. The way it works is this:- you drive on around the circuit and point at your landing pad at 165Kts, gear and ap down and 40 nozzles selected. Power will be about 65% and the hoons amongst us will drive on in like this until the very last possible moment, then use full braking stop to decelerate. I myself sedately take the hover stop at about 0.8Nm. So now all the thrust points down and the slick aerodynamic qualities of the Harrier manifest themselves as 7 a marked deceleration. This in turn means wing lift is decreasing (attitude is held constant at 8 units AOA) so you increase power to keep the ground at bay. It is a fact of life that as you decellerate through 90Kts the lack of wing lift and the trim change induced control inputs require an engine power and therefore JPT that is pretty well just what you will have in a nice steady hover. Therefore 90Kts is a very good time to look at the JPT because if you see more than 670 Dry or 695 Wet than you have an exciting time ahead of you. It is not however the end of the world. Water can be selected ON if not yet in use. By minimising control inputs to those essential to keeping body and soul together the JPT bleed rise can be reduced. Finally the limiters do not act until 710/745 and they can be turned off by the reex action of pushing the throttle harder against a spring which when overcome allows the switch to be pushed off by the throttle itself very neat. In that unlimited situation you will put up the primary red JPT warning at about 770 Dry or 780 Wet. (You cant BS the engineers because it wont reset.) Even then the engine wont throw in the claw and you should be able to put the a/c down before the blades melt. Of course the prudent aviator would have foreseen the problem at 90Kts, nozzled away into wingborne ight and reduced his AUW by burning off, or fuel or stores jettison. To take the case of the Air Defence conguration for which I tabulated weights on page 2; the launch weight is 22,271 lbs and the basic weight for landing would be 15,171 lbs if missiles were not red and full 30mm ammo load retained. On a nil wind 35C, 1,000 Mb tropical day the aircraft can launch from a 500 foot deck run given a WOD of 20Kts. Assuming a mean engine the dry hover weight is 14,150 lbs and the wet hover weight is 16,100 lbs. Clearly we are water committed and the combined fuel/water weight of 900 lb for landing is not huge however the normal calculated dry/wet hover weights include generous QFI type allowances for control inputs so 600 lb fuel + 300 lb H 2 O in the hover is not a problem. Our normal criteria is to land from a hover when the fuel 8 low level warning ashes (at 500 lb) and to aim to be downwind with a minimum of 1,000 lbs so all pilots are used to ying with low fuel levels and you dont bolter in this aircraft. The worst problem you can face in these conditions is a water system failure. In that situation the pilot would have to jettison the Aim 9s, tanks and any remaining water and re out the guns. You cant get rid of the LAU 7s so you end up with a basic weight of about 14,300 lbs so you havent got a lot going for you. This is the time to turn off the limiters and risk cooking the engine to get her down commencing the decel at about 500 lbs of fuel and landing with about 300 lbs. It can be done and it should be remembered that its not always 35C and 1,000 Mb at sea and faint hearted squadrons could operate without guns in which case the basic weight comes down 650 lbs. 10Mb is worth 100 lbs of hover performance and 5C OAT is worth 600 lbs. Avionic Systems The avionic systems in the Sea Harrier are remarkably comparable to those in the A4 generally more modern, mainly better but in some cases inferior. The heart of the system is the Navigation Heading and Altitude Reference System HAVHARS. There is no comparison between HAVHARS and anything in the A4, except perhaps the Squat Switch because both seem to have a hand in everything. The NAVHARS is closely linked with the radar, the HUD and it is the navigation computer. The doppler ground speed and drift can only be read through the NAVHARS display which is also the only practical place to read off the fuel ow. There is a fuel ow gauge but you guessed it it is on the right hand console behind the seat and can only be viewed by raising your right arm and looking past your armpit. Blue Fox Radar My experience with the radar to date is limited to a 2 day simulator course and one sortie in another squadrons aircraft. My squadron drew the short straw and dont get a radar until next month which is a procurement term for perhaps next year. However the 9 screen is about the same size and in about the same place as in the A4 . The hand controller is also in about the same place on the left console as the A4 radar panel and most of your inight ddling will be done there. However the major on/off switches and warning panel is up under the left glareshield. You can have a PPI or B scan presentation on the video screen and max range scale is 100 miles. It is a pulse radar like the A4s but being optimised for A-A the scan angles are greater and you can lock onto designated targets. It is stabilised by the NAVHARS and feeds through it to give intercept steering commands in the HUD. You can also update your navigation on radar discrete points of land. The Navigation Computer The NAVHARS consists of an inertial platform (which is a bit smaller than the AJB3 black box in the aft hell hole of the A4), a doppler radar, an Air Data Computer and a computer which controls the lot and spits out what the pilot wants to know. Apart from the on/off switch for the doppler you can only play with this lot through the Display, Navigation Computer which consists of a multifunction switch, keyboard and digital readout windows. As with the A4 you tell the kit where it is at startup and it computes once you hit a certain speed on takeoff. You can type in the lat & long of various destinations and read off range and bearing in the digital windows or follow a steering command in the HUD. Unlike the A4 you can easily update the nav computer if it is incorrect, by hitting a x switch as you overy the selected destination. You can also update your nav if you insert the lat long of a TACAN station or radar discrete point of land and select TACAN or Radar update before xing. The DNC will display vast amounts of information for you if you play with the rotary switch. As I said it is where you read off ground speed, drift, fuel ow and range and bearing to selected destinations. It will also tell you the wind velocity and direction (just like the A4) and the time it will take to reach the selected destination at your present speed. It is the only place where you 10 can read the TACAN. This is one of my major grievances after the fuel ow gauge there is no equivalent of the A4 BDHI and you cannot y a TACAN approach on a digital readout. Furthermore the compass card on the instrument panel is worse than the one in the Macchi. It is described as being loosely slaved to the NAVHARS heading, and loose is a pretty loose description. It is absolutely useless at the best of times and worse still during or after combat. The other aspect of having TACAN and fuel ow only available for display on the DNC is that you have to look down and physically select the switch. I nd that maddening for what, to me, are two primary sources of information. The accuracy of the Nav computer is obviously better than that in the A4 most of the time. The ADC is for more reliable and it boils down to a function of the heading accuracy of the inertial platform. Although you can slave it to the magnetic ux valve we normally y with the platform in a doppler damped inertial mode. This requires the pilot to tell the computer the aircraft heading at some stage before takeoff. At Yeovilton all our line headings are known and you type in the true heading to the nearest tenth of a degree. On return from a sortie you compare the NAVHARS heading with the known line heading and note the error. In general we would U/S a system that drifted more than a degree. Now we have a mod whereby the maintainers can take out the drift rate if it shows up consistently so heading accuracy has been improved to 0.2 or 0.3 per hour and navigation accuracy is around 0.5-2Nm. Onboard ship it is much harder to get the heading right and even harder to check it after land-on although we do have a digital readout of ships head outside the FlyCo window. It is equally hard to get an accurate position to tell the computer for take off and of course the ship is never at the briefed recovery position anyway. In short there is no hope of monitoring system accuracy at sea. The radio is located on the left side ahead of the throttle and the preset channel change is easy to get at. Unfortunately, however, the manual frequency knob at the far left of the set is not. There is a remote digital frequency readout on the glareshield so you dont 11 have to bend your head as you ddle. The IFF is on the right console and is quite similar to the A4 panel; extensive use is made of IFF in all our ying, especially mode C height readout, and the panel is a bitch to see and use at night or in conditions of high contrast i.e. bright outside, dark in the cockpit. There are no white oodlights such as in the A4. There is an onboard tape recorder which is excellent for taping pilot comments and or RT and ECM. It also plays back to you so Linda Ronstadt can assist you on the long and boring CAP missions. The Sea Harrier has an ECM set which puts it one up on the A4. The kit was rejected by the RAF because of its poor performance on trials. It was therefore going cheap. It was therefore bought by the RN. We are doing trials on it. Its performance is poor. Nevertheless it works most of the time and gives good training value. You get audio indications and a strobe of light on a little screen which indicates the threat bearing (180 in this set). It is certainly better than nothing. The F95 reconnaissance camera is permanently tted and looks out a little window to the right side of the aircraft forward of the cockpit. It is a great device with auto exposure, a window washer and a choice of camera speeds. It looks much the same size as the minipan job in the A4 and I strongly suspect it would be cheaper. It serves us very well as ground and sea recce targets. In addition to the F95 we have a Pilot Display Record (PDR) camera which is the Brit name for a gunsight camera. It is a magnicent training aid because of the wealth of information on the HUD which it photographs. When we get 45 min video cassette coverage to replace the 2.5 mins of lm we will really be able to debrief people. In the meantime it is still he who wins the debrief that won the ght. Flying the Sea Harrier To deal with the easy bits rst the Sea Harrier ies just like an A4 in the instrument patterns and at academic weaponry. You can hit 600Kts plus on the deck with a clean bird and even with DTs 12 (which impose no limitations). With gunpods and 2, 3 or 5x1,000 lb bombs she seems to brickwall at 550560Kts. So there is not much difference at the top end. We climb at 400/.8 except when very light when 300/.8 is recommended. During our recent 1,000 lb bomb trials we averaged 7.30 from brakes release to FL350 with gunpods and 3 bombs plus D/Ts or with 5 bombs. The lightweight climb after weapon delivery was an eyewatering 4.30 to FL400 from a 400Kts start. So climb performance could be said to be a bit better than an A4. Considering the devastating drag of the airframe and the in- credible power of the engine the Sea Harrier is quite an economical machine. Ground and ight idle is 20 lb/min =1,200 pph. (The Brits use lb/min on the gauges which took a bit of getting used to but has distinct advantages if you could nd the gauge to read it.) In conventional forward ight full power gives 210 lb/min =12,600 pph for probably 14,000 lbs thrust. You can put the engine up to 270 ppm = 16,200 pph for very brief periods during takeoff with water on and 107% RPM that is giving you around 20,000 lbs installed thrust. At the standard cruise speed of 400Kts we burn 85-90 lb/min clean and not more than 100 lb/min with guns and 5x1,000 lb bombs i.e. up to 6,000 lb/hr where I recall the A4 giving 420Kts for 4,200 lb/hr with 2xCharlie tanks. At altitude during the bombing trial we were averaging 55 lb/min = 3,300 lb/hr for M .8 which is pretty well the standard cruise speed at FL300FL350. With bombs gone and light weight at FL400 we got back to 36 lb/ min = 2,100-2,200 lb/hr so not quite as slick as an A4 but certainly closer at altitude than on the deck, and the higher Mach number would probably mean the ANM/lb were very similar. Outside the instrument patterns and QFI type ying you would notice the difference when turning the Sea Harrier. The G limits are pretty similar but the S.H. corners at about 420KIAS, and loses speed far quicker in a hard turn at medium altitudes and above. At low level in a strikepro type scenario the vast power output makes up for the wing and you can very quickly regain speed lost in a prolonged turn: Buster really means something. When 13 swanning about at less than 300Kts you can really feel the mush when you try and pull out from dives but again power is the answer and dropping 2060 nozzles pitches the nose up far faster than you can pull it with the stick. There is a place in the world for QFIs. It is not the sort of machine you read the ight manual for and then leap aboard and takeoff. The average A4 pilot would abort his rst engine start, for example, convinced that 2/3 of the fan blades were missing because of the vibration it is most agricultural because of the size of the fan and the jet blast on the tailplane. Even the most experienced convertees admit that their brain is scrambled by the acceleration on takeoff and just as they get it unscrambled it is time to pull in 50 nozzle, radically changing the thrust vector and rescrambling the brain. It is emphasised throughout the course that the Harrier can bite the overcondent and it does regularly. As Ive written before I think of my course of six guys one is dead and two have ejected from situations of their own making. It is very hard to make an objective comparison of the pilot safety factors of both aircraft. After 1,000 hours in the A4 I was obviously pretty comfortable. I am sure I wont feel the same way after 1,000 hours in the Harrier (700 to go). The reduced aerodynamic authority in slow speed ight near the ground is one thing. Mainly the difference lies in the proximity to the limits of control at which you must operate the Harrier in transition to and from the ultimate short eld performance of which it is capable. Takeoff is no problem especially from the ramp as you have 1,500 fpm ROC to play with before the ground/sea gets your attention. It is mainly I think the landing approaches that keep you honest. The combination of minimal power reserves to arrest a sink rate and the inherent directional instability during transition makes for a high work load. In IMC and on a dark night the disorientation that occurs when you play with the nozzles during an approach is a problem that is bound to kill people. It is bad enough with a serviceable HUD with inertial ight path but come the day when you are on the second rate secondary instruments just standby. 14 It would be doing the Harrier an injustice to wrap up on that pessimistic note. It is a magnicent aircraft and a classic in its time. Unfortunately its time was ten years ago and it is a travesty that the political and military bureaucracies have dithered away for so long that the aircraft is struggling to compete with the lightweight ghters and attack aircraft around. As I see it the advanced avionics and match anything subsonic performance of the AV8B should have been produced by the Brits in the late sixties and we should now have in service a supersonic follow on in the F16F18 class. Hand in hand with the performance and avionic improvements would come renement of the handling characteristics which would reduce the operating risks in the VSTOL regime. From what I know of it to date the AV8B will be signicantly easier and safer to operate than the GR3 and Sea Harrier. And you can bet that the fuel ow gauge wont be behind the seat. HAP less A4G Apologies to USN Safety Magazine Cartoon that has already apologised to TOP GUN D e f l e c t i o n Splash One A-4G Photo via Dave Ramsay Navy News 31 August 1990 Navy News 26 Oct 1990 Subj: Passing of Capt David John Ramsay, OAM, RANR 1. Navy is saddened to hear of the passing of CAPT David John Ramsay on 4 Sep 12. 2. CAPT Ramsay joined the Royal Australian Naval College in Jan 63. He was in the last group of Australians to undergo training at the Royal Naval College. Dartmouth in England before returning to complete his bridge watchkeeping training in HMAS Brisbane during her 1971 tour of duty as the last RAN ship to operate with the US Seventh Fleet in Vietnam. 3. CAPT Ramsay then under- went fying training with the Air Force throughout 1972 completrng conversion on to the Skyhawk Aircraf in Dec 73. In early 1977 CAPT Ramsay was the RAN contngent ofcer in the Royal Yacht Britannia during that years Royal tour, 4. In Dec 79 Captain Ramsay was posted to exchange duty with the Royal Navy, fying Sea Harriers that included training and trials during and afer the Falklands Confict. 5. CAPT Ramsay returned to Australia in 1983 and completed a number of staf and sea going postngs,these included commands of both HMAS Creswell and Success. 6. Afer leaving HMAS Success in 1993 CAPT Ramsay undertook postgraduate study before completng two consecutve postngs as the Naval Atache in Jakarta. 7. In 1997. CAPT Ramsay was awarded the Medal of the Order of Australia for meritorious service to naval aviaton leading to the formaton of Commander Australian Naval Aviaton. 8. He transferred to the Naval Reserve in 2001 before joining the Department of Infrastructure and Transport where he had a number of roles in Jakarta. He was instrumental in enhancing the strong bilateral relatonship between the department and their Indonesian counterparts. As a testament to his commitment and skills, CAPT Ramsay was presented with the Secretarys award for excellence in 2011. 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 dnf 10 11 12 13 14 15 RAN FAA Skyhawk A-4G OFS by number 60 Pilots (1 twice - 1 DNF, injured) in total others had informal training/conversion twice 9 No. 16 OFS photo not shown - will include when available later Click on photos to go to a better quality version elsewhere in the pages of this PDF history RAN FAA A-4G OFS (Operational Flying School) list plus other pilots known to have . own A-4G Skyhawk OFS No.1 196768 LR: (back row) Lcdr Fred Lane; Leut Ralph McMillan; Barrie Daly; Barry Diamond; Lcdr Bill Callan; Leut Clive Blennerhassett; Keith John- son; (front row) ALO; Leut Peter Firth (O); (Instructors) Lcdr Dusty King; John Da Costa; Leut Mike Gump USN; Brian Dutch SAWI; AEO OFS No.2 1969 LR: (back row) Sblt Ken Palmer; Gary Northern; Midn Peter Cox (front row) Leut Errol Kavanagh; Dave Collingridge OFS No.3 start Feb 70 LR: Leut Barrie Daly (frst course interrupted by UK AWI training) Lcdr Col Patterson; Leut Pete McNair; Aslt Phil Thompson; John Hamilton OFS No.4 late in 1970? LR: Leut Charlie Rex; Rick Symons; Sblt Murray Smythe OFS No.5 1971 LR: (back) Sblt Graham Donovan; Tony Der Kinderen; (front row) Leut George Heron; Tom Supple OFS No.6 June 1972 LR: Leut Graham Winterfood; Aslt John Siebert; Leut Jack Mayfeld plus Leut Pete Clark (injured in a Macchi ejection earlier fnished course later perhaps OFS No.7?) OFS No.8 1973 LR: Aslt Jerry Clark; Barry Evans; John McCauley OFS No.9 mid-1973 LR: Leut Dave Ramsay; Sblt Ian Shepherd; Leigh Costain (did not fnish broken leg football injury); Andy Sinclair; Neville French OFS No.10 1975 LR: Sblt Ian Shepherd & Andy Sinclair (both restarted OFS defence cutbacks); Midn Kim Baddams; Mal McCoy OFS No.11 1976 LR: Midn Mike Maher; Sblt Colin Tomlinson; Leut Pete Greenfeld OFS No.12 1977? LR: Aslt M. Measday; Leut Allan Clark; Murray Coppins; Sblt Allan Bradtke OFS No.13 1978? LR: Sblt Gary Osmond; Ray France OFS No.14 1980 LR: Midn Paul Kalade; Dave Baddams; Aslt Eamon Lines; Midn Mark Binskin; Leut Rob Bradshaw RN (exchange) OFS No.15 (start July 1981) LR: Aslt Dave Coote; Aslt Mark Boast; Leut John Bartels OFS No.16 (1982) LR: Ray Whitman; Adrian Wilson; Mark Pearsall; Gary Standen RAAF (exchange) Pilots known to have fown A-4G but not having formal OFS training: Cmdr N.E. Lee; Lcdr Peter Marshall; Mike Astbury; Leut Mick Flynn; Graham Quick; Mick Curry; Alan Videan (S2) LSO; (many vacancies...) Leut Chris Olsson was on an OFS sometime or maybe a quick special one in early 1970s - maybe did part of OFS No.6 or No.8? he did a quick one to get to sea with 805 as Senior Pilot. AMAFTU test pilots in early 70s. Lcdr Gerry ODay; Peter McIntyre; USN/USMC exchange pilots: Leut Mike Gump; Leut/ Lcdr John Park; Leut Mike Nordeen; Tom LaMay; John Hershberger; Bob Stumpf; Paul OBrien; Kev Finan; Robert Hanner; Capt Tom White USMC; Chuck Smith USMC; J.P. Conlon was one pilot completing a convers- ion course towards the end of fixed wing flying fl & Lcdr Al Hickling ex-RN Sea Vixen/Phantom pilot Go Back 1 page no rating 10:00 Added: 9 hours ago Views: 24 no rating 10:00 Added: 3 days ago Views: 51 no rating 02:58 Added: 5 days ago Views: 56 no rating 10:00 Added: 6 days ago Views: 51 no rating 10:00 Added: 6 days ago Views: 40 no rating 10:00 Added: 6 days ago Views: 113 no rating 01:39 Added: 1 week ago Views: 43 01:10 Added: 1 week ago Views: 47 10:01 Added: 1 week ago Views: 130 09:56 Added: 1 week ago Views: 84 no rating 04:11 Added: 2 weeks ago Views: 76 no rating 08:04 Added: 2 weeks ago Views: 96 no rating 01:11 Added: 2 weeks ago Views: 52 10:00 Added: 2 weeks ago Views: 108 04:28 Added: 2 weeks ago Views: 58 07:17 Added: 2 weeks ago Views: 163 07:36 Added: 2 weeks ago Views: 109 09:38 Added: 2 weeks ago Views: 102 00:21 Added: 2 weeks ago Views: 173 07:58 Added: 2 weeks ago Views: 429 A4G & HMAS MeIbourne FIight HMAS MeIbourne (III) FFG 05 Sea ... FS9 test TA4G rough circuit 'Shark02' Seaking Engine Sounds ... 'Shark 02' RAN FIeet Air Arm Sea... 'FareweII to a Lady' HMAS MeIbou... S2E/G Tracker Deck Landing Instr... NAS Nowra A4G & S2E/Gs before th... 'Sea EagIes' doco Iate 1970s RAN... A4G WinterfIood HMAS MeIbourne 30jun84 Last RAN FAA Jets Taxi T... 1976 HMAS MeIbourne Fixed Majestic CIass HMAS MeIbourne Last Skyhawk A4G FIying Day NAS ... HS748 DispIay FinaI Fixed Wing D... S2E/G Trackers finaI fIight/disp... GreenfieId VF-805 A4G HMAS MeIbo... Morton VF-805 A4G Skyhawk HMAS M... Skyhawk Crash HMAS MeIbourne. A4G Skyhawk on HMAS MeIbourne 1 2 Next http:ffnz.youtube.comfprofile_videos?user=bengello YouTube - bengello's videos (0) Account QuickList Help Sign Out
Videos | Channels | Community | Upload Channel | Videos | Subscriptions Videos 21-27 of 27 bengello's Videos Edit Videos
06:33 Added: 2 weeks ago Views: 853 09:58 Added: 3 weeks ago Views: 275 00:30 Added: 2 months ago Views: 310 00:05 Added: 2 months ago Views: 60 Winterflood A4G Skyhawk on HMAS RAN FAA Wessex 31B Helicopter fo... Super Puma Helicopter at Moruya RAN Squirrel Helicopter at NAS Previous 1 2 English http:ffnz.youtube.comfprofile_videos?p=r8user=bengello8page=2[10f1f2008 6:01:5+ AN| 00:15 Added: 1 month ago Views: 459 Seaking Helicopter crash http://nz.youtube.com/profile _ videos? user=bengello bengello 01 Oct 08 ***Click any picture to go online to play that ****Youtube Video itself *****Many thanks Dave for provid- ing much content for this huge PDF 9LGHR'9'RI$*RSHUDWLRQVRQ+0$60HOERXUQH 6\VWHP5HTXLUHPHQWV https://skydrive.live.com/?cid= cbcd63d6340707e6&sa=8228397 91#cid=CBCD63D6340707E6&id =CBCD63D6340707E6%21244 Please Click on URL opposite / or above for the Download Page aboard HMAS Melbourne NOW available at Microsoft SkyDrive SpazSinbad page SKYDRIVE The Video DVD is in A4G_Video DVD (42 parts - 4GB total) folder When all 42 parts [OR the entire folder] have been downloaded into same direct- ory, run .EXE file. Then you will have a 4GB Video DVD to burn or run from your computer. The Video DVD is a compilat- ion of A4G ops aboard HMAS Melbourne https://skydrive.live.com/?cid= cbcd63d6340707e6&sa=822839 791#cid=CBCD63D6340707E6&i d=CBCD63D6340707E6%21244 VIDEO DVD of A4G OPS Portable Mirror Landing System D E E P - G U L L Y Photos by Dave Ramsay BOLTER SYMBOL VF-805 Linebook page BOLTER BOLTER BOLTER Please click graphic above for video clip L I N E
U P BOLTER = NOT catching an arrestor wire with aircraft hook THE END
Fleet Air Arm Boys: True Tales from Royal Navy Men and Women Air and Ground Crew, Volume 2: Strike, Anti-Submarine, Early Warning and Support Aircraft since 1945