Aircraft Carrier Question

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by Olefin

I definitely agree on the boneyard aircraft being available by later in the war - at least until the Mexicans overran Davis Monthan - so the question is how much of a priority would the carrier planes have been with the need to get things like stored Phantoms, B-52's, etc.. back up to speed to replace air losses in Europe, Iran and Korea?

I can see at least some F-8's and A-4's for sure but would any have been left in the US for the Lex or would they have been sent overseas immediately?

I live in Tucson and have driven past the DM boneyard many times. I've often wondered if/how those aircraft could be readied for combat operations. It is dry here, and that's a major reason that DM was chosen as the go-to storage place, but the constant sun can really do a number on certain materials- plastics, especially become stiff and brittle. The paint on a lot of the aircraft out there is really faded and it suggests less superficial wear is at play as well. Even microscopic cracks in airframes can cause catastrophic failures. And, so far, we're just talking about airframes. What about electronics?

Are radars and other complex avionics left in place when an aircraft is stored? I honestly don't know, although I imagine that they are not. The heat here can't possibly be good for sensitive electronics. If they're removed prior to storage, where are they? Are they canibalized for spare parts or sold to secondary markets overseas? That's what I've always thought. In either case, the aircraft stored in the boneyards are going to need serious refurbishment in order to be rendered operable. That's going to take time, money, and perhaps the manufacture of new components. How long? Certainly more than a couple of weeks.

Does anyone have any good leads to sources that can answer these questions? I don't want to cause this thread to go off on a major tangent but I'm really curious as to how long-term outdoor storage effects the readiness of modern aircraft.

[mpipes]

I worked in USAF logistics and was involved in a project to basically store wartime vehicles in airtight bags as Israel does. I did a lot of research including what Davis-Montham does. Basically, you "pickle" the vehicle/aircraft. Remove the batteries. Drain the hydraulics and fuel system, and then you run a preservative light oil of some type through the lines to protect from corrosion and purge with nitrogen. The vehicle/aircraft was also jacked up and blocked to protect the tires. On aircraft, every access is coated with a polyurethane coat, including the cockpit. On many, the whole plane is coated. The engine intakes are also sealed as is the exhaust. Most avionics are left in place.

After everything is done, the internal temperature pretty much stays within reasonable limits so you really don't have materials breaking down. B-52s and B-1s have stood alerts without any real concerns for years. All combat aircraft spend most of their time on a tarmac someplace anyway, and the plane's electronics hold up fine as long as they are unpowered. Storage warehouses for avionics get plenty warm and cold.

So how long does it take to get them back in the air? Not long really. Strip off the polyurethane. Take it off the blocks. Add hydraulic fluid. Add power and run up the electronics and hydraulic systems. See what works and what doesn't. Fuel it. Run up the engine and go through preflight. Fix anything that needs it. Taxi and test fly. If everything checks out, you've got a mission capable bird.

Israel has done some testing I know with Mirages and Nesher that had been stored for years, and if I recall correctly, they could get one checked out and service ready in about 6 hours. Again if I recall correctly, mothballed F-4s have been checked out and service ready in about 24 hours. I don't remember how many ground crew were involved, and these were wartime reserve aircraft intended to return to service in a war.

In 1996, B-52Gs would have only arrived within the last 4 years, so all of them are back easy. Same with a lot of F-111s, F-4s, and A-10. Some F-16As and quite a few F-14As were there, but I believe almost all could have been returned to service. The A-7s, F-8s, A-6s, and A-4s would have been there awhile, but a lot of them would be able to fly. The big question was the B-52Ds, Es, and Fs . Those were largely still intact until START kicked in, but a lot of them probably had not been maintained too well or had been cannibalized for parts. There were also still dozen of F-100s and F-105s there too. The biggest problem would have been cannibalized or broken parts. However, each aircraft was meticulously tracked as to what it was missing, and there would still be plenty of aircraft to get a few others back in the air. The way I've envisioned it, 100% of the B-52Gs would have been returned to service; 90% of F-16As, F-14As, F/A-18s, and A-10As; 85% F-111s, A-7s, and A-6s; 70% F-4s, A-4s, and B-52Ds; 60% F-8s, F-105s, and F-100s; and 50% B-52Es and Fs. That would be roughly 1000-1500 airframes if I've guessed right.

In any event, by the time Mexico invaded, there probably would not have been too many flyable planes left. Given the lethality of air defenses, after six months of combat most probably both sides would have been scrambling to get any combat airframe that could be made to fly operational, and I think DM would have been churning out about 50-75 combat airframes a week by that point. Most of them would have been gone by the invasion. That's my opinion anyway.

[Raellus]

Wow. That surprises me. Thanks a lot for the info, Mpipes. That really helps.

[pmulcahy11b]

To me, the limiting factor on flyable aircraft is not availability -- there are probably flyable aircraft sitting idle all over the world. The problem is the tremendous amount of resources required to keep them in an operational condition, and supplying them with the fuel necessary for operation (think of how much fuel an F-15 consumes in full afterburner!). Even a light aircraft like a Piper Cub needs more maintenance, parts, and fuel than most communities are capable of giving it. That's why the Baron hardly ever flies his Mi-8.

[Rainbow Six]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

To me, the limiting factor on flyable aircraft is not availability -- there are probably flyable aircraft sitting idle all over the world. The problem is the tremendous amount of resources required to keep them in an operational condition, and supplying them with the fuel necessary for operation

Agreed. I'd always envisioned surviving air bases / airports still having small numbers of potentially operational aircraft but lacking the means / resources to get them airborne. Potentially it might even be possible to find a helicopter hidden away somewhere (in a barn for example) but without fuel it's as much use as a chocolate teapot (although finding said fuel can make a campaign in its own right)

[Olefin]

It really depends on if you have mechanics available - there were lots of examples in WWII of US aircraft mechanics keeping planes flying in the early days of WWII with insufficent parts - they either got them from hangar queens or they made them or improvised them

now that might mean you have six F-8's getting turned into hanger queens to keep two flying - but it can be done if you have the mechanics who have the know how

[Rainbow Six]

Yeah, but having the best mechanics in the world wont do you any good if you have no fuel...

[Olefin]

there will always be some fuel depending on what areas you are in - MilGov still has some reserves in the US (see A River Runs Thru It for an example)

and places like the UK, Iran, Saudi, Kenya will still be producing fuel - even in the US there are some refineries still working - but the amount would greatly reduce ops and what can be carried - i.e. there is a big difference between fuel to fly F-15's across the Atlantic versus fly them on limited missions for recon or air support

so you might have enough fuel for limited ops - but if you ever had to surge everything you had that was still operational fully fueled it would be exhaust your fuel for some time to come (i.e. several months to years depending on the area)

and let me be clear - I dont mean that goes everywhere - for most of Europe fuel is a thing of the past and will be for quite some time outside of the UK and France

[Rainbow Six]

I agree with you...I think the relevant point here is that from 1998 onwards in my opinion the front line air forces aren't going to be taking 1960's / 70's era aircraft out of storage sites as it's not so much the lack of aircraft that is limiting operations as the lack of fuel...remaining airbases may well still have small numbers of F16's / Mig 29's / Tornados etc which they are struggling to find fuel for as it is so probably don't need more aircraft - they need the fuel. Iirc there is a reference in the Twilight Encounters supplement to the Soviets still having operational Mig 29's used in a photo recon role - Shutterbug I think it was called.

I think the people thay may be more interested in getting old planes out of storage are more likely to be those in areas well away from the front lines where modern combat aircraft are in short supply, for example US forces in California or Texas, both of whom have access to the required fuel but might be lacking in aircraft to utilise said fuel.

The real winners are those that have the aircraft and the fuel...might be interesting to consider what might have remained in the US at places like Top Gun or the Adversary / Aggressor Squadrons (e.g. VFC 13 at Miramar, VFA 127 at Fallon or VFC 12 at Oceana, all of which I think would have operated the F18 in the T2k timeline.

[Olefin]

as for parts - that was one thing that Frank Frey mentioned was happening in Kenya - that they were using East African craftsmen to basically make parts in a very time consuming fashion for the aircraft and ships they had left operational - explaining why the US would be still having men there in addition to the refinery

by the way - where is the UK's main training facility for the RAF?

[Rainbow Six]

In the T2K timeline there wasn't a central training point; basic officer training took place at RAF Cranwell in Lincolnshire, following which nwly commissioned officers would go on to receive specialised training at another location. For pilots initial Pilot training took place at 1 Flying Training School (FTS) which was at RAF Linton on Ouse in Yorkshire flying Jet Povosts and Tucanos. I believe 1 FTS also did basic pilot training for Royal Navy pilots (the Fleet Air Arm)

Advanced training took place at 4 Flying Training School at RAF Valley in Angelesey, Wales (more famous of late for being where Prince William was stationed as a Sea King pilot). Standard fast jet trainer was the Hawk.

After Fast Jet Training a student pilot would go to an Operational Conversion Unit (OCU) where he would be trained on the jet he would fly operationally. OCU's were located at various RAF stations. In time of War some OCU's would form operational Squadrons. e.g. 229 OCU, which trained students on the F3 fighter variant of the Tornado would become 65 Squadron in time of war.

(Above is more or less from memory and without checking any reference material other than Wiki as I am at work - I do have a book on the 1980's era RAF at home which goes into more detail if there's a specific aspect you're interested in. Also other forum members - I'm thinking especially Sanjuro - may be more knowledgeable than me on the subject)

[boogiedowndonovan]

Where's Matt Wiser when you need him?

guy had knowledge about carriers, aircraft and such.

[Sanjuro]

Rainbow is correct about the dispersal of RAF training in the T2k era; much of this was changed in the 1990s as the RAF began to shrink.
Initial Officer Training was at RAF Cranwell (18 weeks), after which the graduates would be given about 15 hours on the DHC1 Chipmunk to assess their potential as trainee pilots (unless they had flown Bulldogs with a University Air Squadron).
Basic Flying Training was carried out at 3 airfields; Cranwell (Jet Provost 5), Linton-on-Ouse, and Church Fenton (both of which had a mixture of JP3 and JP5). Fast jet students went on to Valley, multi-engine to Finningley and rotary to Odiham. Navigators also went to Finningley.
Instructor training was done at the Central Flying School- in the 80s this was at Scampton in Lincolnshire. (Scampton is also famous as the original home of the Dambusters).
In the late 80s the JPs were beginning to be replaced by the Shorts Tucano (licence built, designed by Embraer). All RAF aircraft, from the Chipmunk and Bulldog up, allegedly had the potential for weapons fit; AFAIK the Bulldog had the attachments in the wings to have 2 GPMGs.
Bet you're sorry you asked now!

[Rainbow Six]

Sanjuro, I had a question which I wonder if you can help with? I am sure I read somewhere that in time of War the Red Arrows would be used in an air defence role. Do you know if that is correct and if so would they form an additional Squadron based at Scampton or elsewhere flying the Hawk or would the pilots be dispersed individually or in small groups to other air defence Squadrons? Just curious...

[Sanjuro]

In 1983, BAe was given a contract to modify 88 Hawk T1s to T1A standard; these would carry two Sidewinders and a centreline cannon pod. Given the Hawk's lower speed (subsonic in level flight) they could not cover large areas; according to the RAF's website they were intended "to operate in the secondary air defence role as part of a mixed fighter force within the UK Air Defence Region."
I read this to mean they would have been dispersed, probably in small numbers, around many sites- probably including some using motorways as runways. At a lecture I was told 1000m straights would be long enough... coincidentally, many motorway service stations are near or on such straight sections. RAF Newport Pagnell perhaps? It is unlikely that the Red Arrows would be kept together: as all the display pilots are Flying Instructors they would be more useful spread through the dispersed units to give whatever training was possible.
There was also a suggestion that pilots from the Empire Test Pilot School would be used as an elite squadron; however, the RAF's history of elite squadrons is unhappy. The Dambusters concentrated many of Bomber Command's most experienced crews, then lost over a third of them in a single night- to make it worse, later that summer most of the survivors were killed attacking a variety of difficult targets, notably the Dortmund-Ems canal. Better results were generally obtained by taking a squadron off operations and training it for an individual mission.