Categories
Aircraft

Photos That Showcase the Durability of American Aircraft During World War II

Given the numerous theaters American aircraft flew in throughout World War II, it’s no wonder the majority suffered extensive damage at the hands of the enemy. The following photos show the destruction sustained by various aircraft while in combat, as well as details regarding just how the Americans went about constructing and repairing their aerial vehicles, from production to secret operations.

Production of American aircraft during World War II

American assembly lines during World War II were impressive in all areas, but none more so than in the aircraft sector. Although the United States was manufacturing its own aircraft before the conflict began, it increased production to an impressive rate from 1939-45.

Two airmen staring at the damaged under-section of a Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress
Members of an American Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress crew look at their damaged bomber following a raid on Debrecen, Hungary, September 1944. (Photo Credit: Mondadori / Getty Images)
Lt. Charles Easey kneeling beside the damage propeller of his Republic P-47 Thunderbolt
Lt. Charles Easey of the 12th Air Division looking at the damage sustained by his Republic P-47 Thunderbolt after action over northern Italy, October 1944. (Photo Credit: Mondadori / Getty Images)

In 1939, the US produced 3,000 aircraft, and by the end of World War II, 300,000 had left assembly lines. Over the course of just six years, the country’s aircraft industry became its most productive sector, in part because automobile manufacturers changed their day-to-day to support the war effort. They did this by producing various aircraft parts.

Lt. Quentin Aanenson and another airmen look at the damaged undercarriage of his Republic P-47 Thunderbolt
Lt. Quentin Aanenson inspects the damaged undercarriage of his Republic P-47 Thunderbolt after being hit by flak on an anti-tank mission against German forces in Normandy, August 1944. (Photo Credit: Haywood Magee / Picture Post / Hulton Archive / Getty Images)
Torpedo bomber with shrapnel damage toward the tail section
US Marine Corps torpedo bomber hit by flying shrapnel after the Japanese launched shells toward the air strips on Bougainville, March 1944. The 400 holes in the aircraft were repaired, and it was ready to fly the next morning. (Photo Credit: G.W. Circle / National Archives / Wikimedia Commons / Public Domain)

Most notably, America produced the Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress and B-29 Superfortress, the Curtiss P-40 Warhawk, the Republic P-47 Thunderbolt and the North American P-51 Mustang. All were heavily used in each theater of the war.

“Keeping them flying”

Ground crews were instrumental in maintaining the many types of American aircraft flown during World War II, which involved everything from repairing damage sustained in battle to making alterations so they operated more effectively. Although their job was typically reduced to “keeping them flying,” it was much more complex.

Ground crews repairing a damaged aircraft
Ground crews working on an aircraft damaged in the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, December 1941. (Photo Credit: CORBIS / Getty Images)
Lt. Louis Zamperini looking through a large hole in his damaged aircraft
Lt. Louis Zamperini examines damage to the fuselage of his Consolidated B-24 Liberator, May 1943. The large hole was caused by a cannon shell fired from a Japanese-flown Mitsubishi A6M Zero, which scored three other hits before Zamperini’s aircraft managed to fly back. (Photo Credit: PhotoQuest / Getty Images)

Mechanics underwent three steps of training: basic, technical and unit. They would select a specialty, after which they’d undergo extensive training to become either a welder, metal worker or propeller specialist. Beginning in 1943, every American airman had to wear a special patch on their uniform to indicate what their technical specialty was.

Airman examining a large hole in the wing of the Martin B-26 Marauder Idiot's Delight II
Airman with the Eighth Air Force inspects a gaping hole in the wing of the Martin B-26 Marauder Idiot’s Delight II after it returned from battle against German forces in France, September 1943. (Photo Credit: Samuel Goldstein / Keystone Features / Getty Images)

In most cases, the crewmen would be transferred to a squadron once their training was complete, and they were able to focus on repairs and maintenance. They traveled with their units to their intended operational theater, which some were able to choose. Other mechanics were sent to work at depots or in mobile repair units.

Air Service Command

On a much larger scale than individual squadron mechanics, the Air Service Command, as it was known during World War II, played a major role in the repair of American aircraft operated by the US Army Air Forces. Essentially, its role was to manage the storage and distribution of supplies needed to repair and maintain aircraft operating in the many theaters of the conflict.

Tom Trainer and Jim Davis standing next to the damaged Martin B-26 Marauder Miss Emily
Navigator Tom Trainer stands with pilot Jim Davis next to the Martin B-26 Marauder Miss Emily, which was damaged during a mission, 1942. (Photo Credit: Hulton-Deutsch Collection / CORBIS / Getty Images)
Boeing B-17C Flying Fortress parked on the tarmac with its back half missing
Damaged Boeing B-17C Flying Fortress on the tarmac at Hickam Field after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, December 1941. (Photo Credit: Hulton Archive / Getty Images)

While its members operated out of the US, it was also responsible for controlling the many air depots outside of the country’s continental limits. Throughout the war, however, what the Air Service Command controlled fluctuated greatly, as officials realized it was better for an individual unit commander to have control over their resources.

Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress with extensive damage to its nose
Extensive damage sustained to the nose of a Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress after being shot by anti-aircraft artillery during bombing runs over Germany. (Photo Credit: USAAF / Interim Archive / Getty Images)
Two airmen inspecting a damaged Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress
Airmen checking a damaged Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress in Italy following a raid on Debrecen, Hungary, September 1944. (Photo Credit: Mondadori / Getty Images)

The Air Service Command had many bases in the US, which were used for a variety of purposes, including the training of 5,000 men to repair aircraft as part of a top-secret project. This work was done out of its base at Brookley Army Air Field, Alabama.

Operation Ivory Soap

While most aircraft were maintained by standard ground crews, there were special fleets used in the Pacific Theater to keep them in the fight. Operation Ivory Soap was a classified project, which saw six Liberty ships converted into repair vessels.

Ground crews standing below a Douglas C-47 Skytrain missing a number of parts
Douglas C-47 Skytrain being dismantled at an Air Service Command salvage depot, as sufficient parts for repair couldn’t be obtained, 1944. (Photo Credit: Photo12 / UIG / Getty Images)

These large vessels were specifically used to repair the B-29, as the aircraft was at the heart of the American forces’ island hopping strategy in the Pacific during World War II. These repair ships meant aircraft conducting long distance missions away from Allied airfields had somewhere to land for repairs, refueling and rearmament.

Lt. W.J. Hoelle staring at damage to a Lockheed P-38 Lightning
Lt. W.J. Hoelle surveying the damage to the wing of a Lockheed P-38 Lightning in North Africa, 1943. (Photo Credit: European / FPG / Getty Images)

In addition to Liberty ships, there were also 18 Aircraft Maintenance Units used to repair smaller fighter aircraft, helicopters and amphibious vehicles on auxiliary aircraft repair ships. The first Aircraft Repair Unit was deployed in October 1944, with the remainder of the fleet sent into the field by February 1945.

Unfortunately, regardless of the attempts made to repair American aircraft, there sometimes wasn’t anything that could be done about the heavy wear they faced during aerial combat. By the end of World War II, it’s estimated the American forces lost nearly 95,000 aircraft, of which 52,951 were destroyed or severely damaged during combat or missions in the field. That being said, their engineering was such that many allowed for their pilots to safely return to base, despite their damage.
Categories
Aircraft

Blohm & Voss BV 141: The Asymmetrical German Aircraft That Shouldn’t Have Been Able to Fly – But Did

The Blohm & Voss BV 141 was designed as a tactical reconnaissance aircraft. While passed over by the German Air Ministry for the Focke-Wulf Fw 189 Uhu, it became the better known of the two, due to its asymmetrical body. The aircraft’s unusual design made it appear as though it shouldn’t have been able to safely take to the air. However, tests showed it was able to fly without issue.

Blohm & Voss BV 141 parked on a runway
Blohm & Voss BV 141. (Photo Credit: Aircraft of the Fighting Powers Vol III / H J Cooper / O G Thetford / D A. Russell / Wikimedia Commons / Public Domain)

In 1937, two years prior to the start of World War II, the Air Ministry issued a call to German manufacturers for a single-engine reconnaissance aircraft. A number of companies submitted designs, with the favorable option initially being the Arado Ar 198. When the prototype proved to be unsuccessful, however, the two-engine Focke-Wulf Fw 189 Uhu was chosen, despite not meeting the single-engine requirement laid out by the Luftwaffe.

Privately, Blohm & Voss began working on their own design for a new reconnaissance aircraft, resulting in the creation of the BV 141. Developed by German military aircraft designer Richard Vogt, it featured a rather unusual asymmetrical design that made it appear lopsided both on the ground and from the air.

Both the starboard and port sides were connected via the wing element at the forward portion of the aircraft. While the BV 141’s design should have meant it couldn’t safely take to the air, due to a risk of rolling, its weight was evenly supported by lift from the wings.
Two pilots standing in front of a grounded Blohm & Voss BV 141
Blohm & Voss BV 141. (Photo Credit: Unknown Author / P.K. Luftwaffe / Wikimedia Commons CC BY-SA 3.0 de)

In terms of armaments, the Blohm & Voss BV 141 featured a total of four machine guns – two rear-mounted flexible 7.92 mm MG 15s and two fixed-forward 7.92 mm MG 17s. The aircraft was also equipped to carry four SC 50 bombs.

Initially, the BV 141 was powered by a BMW 132N radial engine, which ran the aircraft’s three-blade propeller system. This was later upgraded to the more powerful BMW 801, which provided it with a range of 1,200 miles. The BV 141’s maximum speed was 229 MPH at sea level and 272 MPH at an altitude of 5,000 meters.

Pilot sitting in the Plexiglas-glazed gondola on the starboard side of the Blohm & Voss BV 141
Pilot sitting in the Plexiglas-glazed gondola on the starboard side of the Blohm & Voss BV 141. (Photo Credit: Scholz / Wikimedia Commons CC BY-SA 3.0 de)

Three prototypes and an additional five BV 141As were produced for evaluation by the Air Ministry. The aircraft’s development wasn’t supported by many, but did have an advocate in Generaloberst Ernst Udet, a World War I veteran and the director of the Air Ministry’s research and development section.

The BMW 801 engine was installed in the BV 141B after the Air Ministry determined the initial version of the aircraft was underpowered. However, by the time the “B” variant was produced, the Fw 189 had already entered production. As well, the BMW 801 was needed for more proven aircraft, such as the Focke-Wulf Fw 190 Würger, lessening the likelihood the BV 141 would have entered full-scale service.

Blohm & Voss BV 141 in flight
Blohm & Voss BV 141. (Photo Credit: Unknown Author / P.K. Luftwaffe / Wikimedia Commons CC BY-SA 3.0 de)
A total of 20 Blohm & Voss BV 141Bs were ordered, all of which were produced and delivered. As the Allied forces advanced into Germany, a number of wrecked ones were discovered. One was captured by the British and sent back to the United Kingdom for examination.
None survived into the 21st century.
Categories
Aircraft

The US Air Force Panicked When Its Top-Secret Stealth Fighter Crashed Into the California Wilderness

In July 1986, a Lockheed F-117 Nighthawk crashed in Sequoia National Forest – not that the US Air Force wanted anyone to know. As the incident began making headlines nationwide, the military went to great lengths to keep the identity of the aircraft a secret, going to far as to replace the wreckage with that of a McDonnell F-101A Voodoo.

What officials failed to realize is that they were actually increasing public interest in their attempts to keep everything classified.

Mysterious crash in Sequoia National Forest

Burned sequoia trees in Sequoia National Forest
Sequoia trees damaged by wildfires that occurred in Sequoia National Forest in 2017. (Photo Credit: Carlos Avila Gonzalez / The San Francisco Chronicle / Getty Images)
On July 11, 1986, the US Air Force conducted a test flight of the F-117 Nighthawk, which, at the time, was still a top-secret project. At around 2:00 AM that morning, the aircraft crashed while flying over Sequoia National Forest, killing the pilot and triggering a 150-acre brush fire. The blaze was eventually brought under control by firefighters from Kern County and the US Forest Service.
In a statement, the Kern County Sheriff’s Office said, “The whole area has been restricted, including the air space above the crash site. There will be military aircraft in the area, and anyone entering the area will be dealt with appropriately by the Air Force.”
A statement from the Air Force was equally as vague, only revealing that a US military aircraft had crashed in a general area of Sequoia National Forest and that a board of officers had been appointed to investigate the incident. “That’s the guidance we’ve been given from Washington,” said Staff Sgt. Lorri Wray. “We can’t give out any details.”
All a Pentagon spokesperson would reveal, when asked, was that the aircraft was “not a bomber.”

Replacing the F-117 Nighthawk with an F-101A Voodoo

McDonnell F-101A Voodoo parked on a runway
To keep the development of the Lockheed F-117 Nighthawk a secret, the US Air Force replaced the wreckage with that of a McDonnell F-101A Voodoo. (Photo Credit: USAF / Wikimedia Commons / Public Domain)

US Air Force personnel worked diligently to pick up the debris from the F-117 Nighthawk, after which the downed aircraft was replaced by a crashed F-101A Voodoo, which had been stored at the mysterious Area 51 in Nevada. The former had been out of service with the Air Force since 1972 and the Air National Guard since ’82.

The crash immediately sparked public attention, with many assuming the aircraft had originated from Edwards Air Force Base, California, located approximately 65 miles from the crash site. The speculation arose due to the fact that aircraft tested out of the base are often more-advanced than those one would typically see take to the skies. These include prototypes, new bombers and ordinary aircraft that have been modified.

Among those tested there have been the Northrop F-20 Tigershark and the Rockwell B-1 Lancer.

Sources incorrectly reveal the aircraft was an F-19

Lockheed F-117A Nighthawk in flight
Lockheed F-117A Nighthawk. (Photo Credit: Images Press / Getty Images)

In an article published by the Associated Press on the day of the crash, International Arms Combat editor Andy Lightbody shared that unnamed sources had told him the aircraft was an F-19. The largely-hypothetical aircraft, which the US Air Force has never confirmed actually exists, has long been a topic of legend among those with an interest in military aviation.

The idea that the US military was developing a classified stealth aircraft with the designation “F-19” came about following the announcement for the F-20. As its predecessor was the McDonnell Douglas F/A-18 Hornet, many assumed a new fighter would have been given the next number in the sequence. Since that wasn’t the case, speculation arose regarding a top-secret project.

The Air Force quickly dispelled these rumors, saying the discrepancy was the result of Northrop specifically requesting that the Tigershark have the F-20 designation. Despite this, there are some who believe the F-19 to have been in development, with the task of manufacturing the fighter given to Lockheed.

Unveiling the F-117 Nighthawk

Prototype for the Lockheed Martin Have Blue parked near a building
Lockheed Martin presented the Have Blue to DARPA for consideration as the US Air Force’s next stealth fighter. The prototype eventually became the F-117 Nighthawk. (Photo Credit: US Air Force / DARPA / Wikimedia Commons / Public Domain)

The Lockheed F-117 Nighthawk came about in the 1970s in response to a study conducted by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), which found that aircraft manned by the United States were unexpectedly vulnerable to adversary forces. This led the agency to hold a competition for a new stealth fighter design, which Lockheed Martin’s Skunk Works won.

A few years after the contract was awarded, in 1981, the F-117 underwent its first test flight, with deliveries to the US Air Force occurring the following year. Despite becoming operational just two years later, the stealth fighter was kept shrouded in secrecy, with the military only revealing its development to the public in 1988. Two years later, civilians were given their first glimpse of the aircraft.

Only 64 were built during the F-117’s service life, of which five were prototypes. Along with seeing service during the Gulf War, the aircraft featured in the Yugoslav Wars, during which one was shot down by a surface-to-air missile (SAM). The stealth fighter was retired in 2008 and replaced by the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor.
Despite this, a fleet of F-117s are kept in airworthy condition.

F-117 Nighthawk specs

Lockheed F-117 Nighthawk dropping a GBU-27 Paveway III mid-flight
Lockheed F-117 Nighthawk dropping a GBU-27 Paveway III laser-guided bomb during an exercise. (Photo Credit: MSGT EDWARD SNYDER / Defense Link / Wikimedia Commons / Public Domain)
Designed to deflect radar, the F-117 Nighthawk featured angled panels coated with radar-absorbing material, making the aircraft virtually invisible on-screen. It was capable of reaching a maximum speed of Mach 0.92, thanks to its two General Electric F404-F1D2 turbofan engines, and had a range of 1,070 miles.
Other important features were that the F-117 had a V-tail and was air refuelable. Additionally, it was operated through the use of quadruple-redundant fly-by-wire flight controls, which had been derived from those used by the General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon, the F/A-18 Hornet, the McDonnell Douglas F-15E Strike Eagle and the Boeing B-52 Stratofortress.
Flown primarily by the US Air Force, the stealth fighter was operated by the 412th Test Wing out of Edwards Air Force Base; the 4450th Tactical Group and 37th Tactical Fighter Wing out of Tonopah Test Range, in Nevada; and the 49th Fighter Wing out of Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico.
Categories
Aircraft

F-16 vs F-18: Key Differences Between the US Military’s Most Iconic Fighters

General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon vs McDonnell Douglas F-18 Hornet – which one would win in an aerial battle? These two aircraft are among the most dependable and deadly in the US military’s arsenal, and they’ve helped win wars, defend ships and redefine the technological prowess that is American innovation.

Despite their similarities, the F-16 and F-18 have a number of differences, and it’s these that’ll reveal which aircraft is truly the most superior of the two.

History of the F-16 Fighting Falcon and F-18 Hornet

McDonnell Douglas F-18 Hornets parked on the flight deck of the USS Harry S. Truman (CVN-75)
McDonnell Douglas F-18 Hornets onboard the USS Harry S. Truman (CVN-75), 2018. (Photo Credit: Aris Messinis / AFP / Getty Images)

The General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon, now manufactured by Lockheed Martin, was introduced in 1978. This multirole, air superiority fighter costs upwards of $14 million to produce, and its adaptability and speed make it an indispensable fixture of the Air Force.

Over 4,600 have been manufactured since 1973, with a number of countries (Pakistan, Chile, Belgium, etc.) operating the aircraft through such conflicts as Operation Desert Storm, the 1982 Lebanon War and the Soviet-Afghan War. The F-16’s combat success and popularity has resulted in the fighter becoming the world’s most numerous fixed-wing aircraft in active military service.

The McDonnell Douglas F-18 Hornet was introduced in 1983 as America’s first all-weather fighter and attack aircraft. Flown by both the US Navy and Marine Corps, it’s designed to deploy from aircraft carriers and is considered one the most aerodynamic aircraft operated by the US military.
The F-18 is favored for its increased weapons-carrying abilities. It’s operated by such countries as Spain, Finland and Canada, among others, and has seen action during the likes of Operation El Dorado Canyon, the War In Afghanistan and the Iraq War.
In 1999, the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet entered service, as a replacement for the Grumman F-14 Tomcat. Larger and more advanced than the standard F-18, its equipped to carry air-to-surface and air-to-air missiles, with its primary armament being the M61 Vulcan. Over 600 have been produced, and it continues to serve alongside its less-advanced predecessor.

F-16 vs F-18 – Which has the better design?

Lockheed Martin F-16CJ Fighting Falcon in flight
Lockheed Martin F-16CJ Fighting Falcon. (Photo Credit: US Air Force / Getty Images)

Despite its earlier design, the F-16 Fighting Falcon is one of the most cost-effective, efficient and maneuverable aircraft in the Air Force’s arsenal. Thanks to the development of older aircraft, such as the McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle and General Dynamics F-111 Aardvark, it’s equipped with reliable systems that give it a wide combat radius.

The F-16 was developed during the Lightweight Fighter (LWF) program as the YF-16. It can locate targets, regardless of weather conditions, and can fly more than 500 miles in an air-to-surface role. The aircraft can deliver weapons with extreme accuracy, all while defending itself from enemy action. It’s also the first to use the relaxed static stability/fly-by-wire (RSS/FBW) flight control system, giving it increased maneuverability and performance.

The cockpit of the F-16 was redesigned to include a bubble canopy, which gives pilots increased visibility through the side and rear. A side-stick controller was also implemented for better control while performing high-g missions. This feature includes hand pressure sensors that send electrical signals to the flight control systems, allowing for increased instantaneous changes while in a tense combat situation.

Onboard avionics systems are equipped with advanced navigation, including enhanced global positioning (GPS) and inertial navigation systems (EGI), which send information to pilots. Counter-pressure pods, high-tech radios and instrument landing systems are also integrated into the aircraft.
The F-18 Hornet is also an all-weather fighter that features a fly-by-wire system, advanced navigation and other similar features. However, one aspect sets it apart from the F-16. Its canted vertical stabilizers allow for the F-18’s extremely high angle of attack, giving pilots the ability to perform high-g pull-ups à la Top Gun (1986).
On top of this, the F-18 was designed with Leading-Edge Extensions (LEXs), allowing pilots to remain in control while flying at higher altitudes. It was built with the intention of requiring less maintenance, meaning reduced downtime is required between missions.
Finally, the F-18 was one of the first to use multifunction displays, meaning pilots can switch between fighter and attack roles (or both) with just the push of a button.

F-16 vs F-18 – Need for speed

General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon in flight
General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon. (Photo Credit: Muhammed Enes Yildirim / Anadolu Agency / Getty Images)

Both the F-16 Fighting Falcon and F-18 Hornet are capable of reaching incredible speeds. However, they do differ ever so slightly. The former can reach a top speed of Mach 2 – twice the speed of sound. The F-18, on the other hand, can only reach Mach 1.7-1.8.

The two also have different engines. The F-16 is a single-engine aircraft equipped with one of two types of power plants, either a Pratt & Whitney F100-PW-200/220/229 or a General Electric F110-GE-100/129. These produce around 29,000 pounds of thrust. The F-18 is powered by two General Electric F404-GE-402 turbofan engines, which produce 17,750 pounds of thrust.

Survivability is greatly affected by the number of engines an aircraft has. If an F-16 loses its lone one, the pilot has no choice but to eject before the fighter nose dives. F-18s, however, can survive on one engine if the other is lost, enabling the aircraft to safely return back to the aircraft carrier.

F-16 vs F18 – How do they fair in aerial combat?

McDonnell Douglas F-18 Hornet in flight
McDonnell Douglas F-18 Hornet. (Photo Credit: LCPL John Mcgarity / USMC / Wikimedia Commons / Public Domain)

Combat is where the F-16 Fight Falcon and F-18 Hornet truly take off. Both are capable of air-to-air, air-to-ground, surveillance and reconnaissance missions. Several slight differences help define this. The F-18 has a range of 1,253 miles, vs the F-16’s much higher 2,002 miles. The latter also has a higher ceiling of 55,000 feet, compared to the F-18’s 50,000 feet.

The F-16 can stay in the air for much longer without refueling. It’s also faster and more maneuverable, and can withstand higher g than the F-18. Its smaller size and bubble canopy cockpit provide increased visibility, a key factor in determining the outcome of a mission.

One study analyzed dogfight victories by looking at the correlation between who was able to get “eyes on” their targets first and the outcome of the engagement. Typically, whoever first saw their opponent had an immediate advantage, and a wider range of visibility combined with a smaller aircraft meant the F-16 would have a better chance of locking eyes first.

F-16 vs F-18 – How maneuverable are these advanced aircraft?

General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon in flight
General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon. (Photo Credit: Master Sgt. Benjamin Bloker / USAF / Wikimedia Commons / Public Domain)

Speed and firepower are only half of what makes an aircraft successful in combat. The ability to maneuver through the air and around enemies and obstacles can make all the difference when pursuing – or outrunning – someone.

The F-16 Fighting Falcon can handle maneuvers of up to 9 g, giving it the ability to quickly change direction at incredible speeds and angles. During the design process, the engineers at General Dynamics selected a variable-camber wing with airfoil, which can be adjusted through the relaxed static stability/fly-by-wire flight control system.

The F-16 was also intentionally designed to be slightly aerodynamically unstable, to reduce drag and improve its maneuverability. When an aircraft is aerodynamically stable, more effort has to be exerted, producing drag and lessening maneuverability. This and the fighter’s combat radius “exceed that of all potential threat fighter aircraft.”
The F-18 Hornet is close behind with 7.5 g worth of maneuverability. Its thrust-to-weight ratio and dual engines help make it a powerful opponent in a dogfight, and its Leading Edge Extensions and canted vertical stabilizers allow for easy handling, even when attacking at high angles. Similarly to the F-16, it features a digital fly-by-wire control system.

F-16 vs F-18 – Firepower is where it’s at

Boeing F/A-18E Super Hornet on the flight deck of the USS Nimitz (CVN-68)
Boeing F/A-18E Super Hornet onboard the USS Nimitz (CVN-68), 2013. (Photo Credit: Alberto Pizzoli / AFP / Getty Images)

Air Intercept Missiles (AIMs) are a key part of combat for modern aircraft, but the F-16 Fighting Falcon originally didn’t equip radar-guided missiles. It wasn’t until the Block 15 ADF variant was unveiled in 1986 that it was able to fire the AIM-7 Sparrow.

Other air-to-air missiles equipped by the F-16 include the AIM-9 Sidewinder, the MBDA R550 Magic 2, the Raytheon AMRAAM, and the MBDA Skyflash and ASRAAM. Ordnance is fired from nine hard points – three under each wing, one on each wing tip and another under the fuselage – and launched via LAU-88 launchers and MAU-12 and Orgen ejector racks.

The port wing of the F-16 contains a 20 mm General Electric M61A1 multi-barrel cannon. There are also several air-to-surface missiles that can be carried by the aircraft (Maverick, Shrike and HARM), as well as anti-ship missiles, such as the AGM-119 Penguin and AGM-84 Harpoon. This is on top of its Paveway laser-guided bombs, smaller munitions, and Joint Standoff and Direct Attack weapons.
The F-18 Hornet could carry radar-guided missiles from the get-go, as it was designed to replace an attack aircraft and defend aircraft carriers. It’s largely equipped with the same armament as the F-16 – it’s just that, for the most part, it had many of the weapons when it entered service.

Which is the better aircraft?

Aerial view of military aircraft parked on a runway
US Air Force aircraft. (Photo Credit: aviation-images.com / Universal Images Group / Getty Images)

Despite their differences, the F-16 Fighting Falcon and F-18 Hornet are both cutting-edge, dependable and lethal. Some say it has less to do with the aircraft and everything to do with the pilots who fly them. One Air Force traffic controller shared his opinion on the best pilots in the military, telling SOFREP:

“[The Navy pilots] are very precise flyers. When they would come in on a landing approach they would be dead perfect on the glide path. I can’t remember ever telling any of those Navy guys to correct their rate of descent or speed. They would be flying PERFECTLY on it the whole time. […] They were just… better.”

Certain aircraft are also more suited to different scenarios. An F-16 would be a better choice for long-range missions that require more speed and maneuverability, while the F-18 would provide more firepower and offensive capabilities in a combat scenario. While the former was initially slated to be replaced by 2025, delays have resulted in it being guaranteed a further two decades of service. The F-18s are slated to be replaced at some point between 2025-30.

Categories
Aircraft

Pave Low: Converting Search and Rescue Helicopters for Use In Special Ops

Sikorsky MH-53 Pave Lows had the ability to perform both search and rescue and special operations missions. “Pave” stands for “Precision Avionics Vectoring Equipment,” the all-weather sensor system that converted several HH-53s into these advanced helicopters. Their long service life with the US military is proof of their effectiveness, with them having racked up a long list of missions and flight hours.

Early variants of the Sikorsky HH-53

View of a Sikorsky HH-53 "Super Jolly Green Giant" from the door of a helicopter flying nearby
Sikorsky HH-53 “Super Jolly Green Giant” with the 40th Aerospace Rescue and Recovery Squadron over Vietnam, October 1972. (Photo Credit: Ken Hackman / USAF / Wikimedia Commons / Public Domain)

The HH-53 was similar to the Sikorsky CH-53A Sea Stallion flown by the US Marine Corps. Better known as the “Super Jolly Green Giant,” it operated throughout the Vietnam War. The HH-53B variant had a retractable in-flight refueling probe and a rescue hoist located just above the passenger door. It held spindle-shaped jettisonable 650-gallon fuel tanks and was armed with either three GAU/2A 7.62 mm six-barreled miniguns or .50-caliber Browning machine guns.

For protection, the HH-53B was equipped with 1,200 pounds of armor, and it was capable of carrying a five-person crew.

The HH-53C was introduced into service in 1968. Forty-four were built. They were similar to their predecessor, with the most noticeable difference being the removal of the fuel-tank bracing struts. In the earlier variant, it was quickly realized the tanks were affecting the helicopter’s overall performance when full, so smaller 450-gallon tanks took their place.

The HH-53C variant was also equipped with more armor and fitted with a better communications system to improve contact with other craft. In the later stages of the Vietnam War, some were fitted with countermeasures pods to handle heat-seeking missiles.

Introduction of Pave Low III

Pilot sitting in the cockpit of a Sikorsky MH-53 Pave Low
US Air Force pilot with the 20th Expeditionary Special Operations Squadron conducting a pre-flight check of a Sikorsky MH-53 Pave Low at Joint Base Balad, Iraq, September 2008. (Photo Credit: Staff Sgt. Aaron Allmon / U.S. Air Force / Wikimedia Commons / Public Domain)

By 1975, an HH-53B was fitted with the Pave Low II system, changing its designation to YHH-53H. With more adjustments to the system, eight HH-53Cs were then fitted with the system. They were re-designated HH-53H Pave Low IIIs and came with a bunch of upgrades. They became operational on July 1, 1980, and were, at that point, prepared for long-range, low-level missions.

Improvements made by the Pave Low system included forward-looking infrared imagers (FLIRs), as well as terrain-following (TFR) and terrain-avoidance radar. They also packed Doppler-radar navigation and inertial guidance systems (INS), and were equipped with computerized moving-map displays. Radar-warning receivers and chaff-flare dispensers were also added.

In 1986, the CONSTANT GREEN program provided even more improvements to the HH-53H Pave Low IIIs, fitting them with blue-green lighting in their cockpits, making them compatible with night-vision goggles. Following this, they were reclassified as “special operations” helicopters and given the designation MH-53H – “M” standing for “Multi-mission.”

Now, they were upgraded to support both night and adverse weather operations.
Within the Pave Low III program, nine MH-53Hs and 32 HH-53s were converted into MH-53Js. With the upgrades, the MH-53Js became the largest, most powerful and most technologically-advanced helicopters at the US Air Force’s disposal. Their job was to drop-off, pick-up and supply Special Forces behind enemy lines, and were still capable of engaging in search and rescue (CSAR) missions.
Between 1986-90, 31 HH-53Bs, HH-53Cs and CH-53s were upgraded to the new MH-53J configuration. All MH-53Hs were also upgraded, making a total of 41 MH-53Js.

Operation Eagle Claw disaster

Sikorsky MH-53J Pave Low in flight
Sikorsky MH-53J Pave Low with the 21st Special Operations Squadron. (Photo Credit: Staff Sgt. Dave Nolan / Wikimedia Commons / Public Domain)

In the decades these helicopters served, they participated in numerous missions.

The failed rescue of 52 embassy staff in Iraq during Operation Eagle Claw is what sparked the conversion of the choppers into special operations craft. The Pave Low fleet was assigned to the 20th Special Operations Squadron at Hurlburt Field, Florida. After proving their success, they were assigned to the 21st and 31st Special Operations Squadrons in Europe and East Asia. The 551st Special Operations Squadron at Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico also received MH-53Js for training purposes.

MH-53J Pave Lows took part in several critical combat missions for the US Air Force. During Operation Just Cause, the US invasion of Panama, five MH-53Js with the 20th were deployed. They conducted reconnaissance, MEDIVAC, logistics, fire support and small team insertion. Other MH-53Js helped lead the first missions of the Gulf War and War in Iraq.
Several MH-53J Pave Lows were also responsible for evacuating some of the 425 US citizens from the American Embassy located in the war-torn Liberian capital of Monrovia in 1996. Success in this mission proved their implementation to special operations was beneficial and could have greatly benefitted Operation Eagle Claw.
Pave Lows often exercised their CSAR capabilities, despite operating as special operations craft. Some of the fleet successfully rescued two US pilots that had been shot down in Serbia in 1999. They then participated in several dangerous missions in Iraq from 2003 until the end of Pave Low operations.

Retirement of the Sikorsky MH-53 Pave Low

Sikorsky MH-53M Pave Low IV on display
Sikorsky MH-53M Pave Low IV. (Photo Credit: US Air Force / Wikimedia Commons / Public Domain)

The final mission for the MH-53 Pave Low fleet was on September 27, 2008. The six remaining flew in support of special operations being conducted in Southwest Asia. It wasn’t long after that the rest of the fleet was retired, replaced by the Bell Boeing V-22 Osprey, which remains in service to this day.

Several MH-53 Pave Low variants stand on-display throughout the US, including at Hurlburt Air Field and Kirkland Air Force Base.
Categories
Aircraft

The Republic XF-84H Thunderscreech Was So Loud It Made Ground Crews Sick

The US Air Force has developed a number of experimental aircraft over the decades, but none was as interesting as the Republic XF-84H Thunderscreech. A derivative of the F-84 Thunderstreak, it was the “loudest aircraft ever built” – and among the most issue-riddled. As a result, it was canceled after just a handful of test flights.

Developing a new type of carrier aircraft

Republic XF-84H Thunderscreech parked on a runway
Photo Credit: U.S. Air Force / National Museum of the United States Air Force

The Republic XF-84H Thunderscreech began life as Project 3347. It was developed following a US Navy request for an aircraft that could operate from aircraft carriers without the need for a catapult. This meant it needed to achieve jet speeds, while also featuring the same low fuel consumption, long range and low landing speeds of propeller-driven aircraft.

Co-sponsored by the US Air Force’s Wright Air Development Center at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, the prototypes were originally designated “F-106.” They were subsequently re-designated the XF-84H, after the Republic F-84 Thunderstreak from which it was semi-derived.

When the Navy canceled its order, the XF-84H became a research aircraft for the Air Force’s Propeller Laboratory at Wright-Patterson AFB, with the aim now being to test subsonic propellers.

Republic XF-84H Thunderscreech specs

Republic XF-84H Thunderscreech parked on a runway
Photo Credit: San Diego Air & Space Museum Archives / Wikimedia Commons / Public Domain

Before we get into what made the Republic XF-84H Thunderscreech so unique, let’s get the basics out of the way. The aircraft was 51.5 feet long, with a wingspan of 33.5 feet. It was powered by an Allison XT40-A-1 turboprop engine capable of producing 4,360 kW of power and a range of 2,000 miles. Also notable was the XF-84H’s airframe, which was a modified version of Republic F-84 Thunderstreak’s.

The turboprop engine was located behind the cockpit and connected to the nose-mounted propeller via an extension shaft, which spun faster than the speed of sound. This allowed the XF-84H to have a projected speed of Mach 1.18, which meant it became the only turboprop-powered aircraft to feature an afterburner. While capable of providing an additional 5,390 kW of power, it was never used.

Finally, the XF-84H was the first aircraft to feature a retractable and extendable ram air turbine, which swung out to provide electrical and hydraulic power in the event of engine failure.

Issues with the Republic XF-84H Thunderscreech

Republic XF-84H Thunderscreech parked on a runway
Photo Credit: USAF / National Museum of the US Air Force / Wikimedia Commons / Public Domain

The Republic XF-84H Thunderscreech was plagued with issues that made it dangerous to fly.

Similar to aircraft equipped with the T40 – North American XA2J Super Savage and Douglas A2D Skyshark – its shafts suffered from aggressive vibrations when traveling at high speeds. In addition to this, the engine required a 30-minute warm-up period, which made it unsuited for use in combat situations.

Given the XF-84H’s speed, special propellers were needed – and this is where the majority of the problems arose. The torque produced by the propellers destabilized the aircraft, with it wanting to spin around them as a result. Attempts were made to rectify this, including the addition of a triangular fin behind the cockpit, but the designers were never able to fully fix the issue.
All this, paired with high maintenance requirements, various equipment failures and the inability for the XF-84H to actually hit the speeds it was designed to made it a particularly problematic aircraft.

Testing the ‘loudest aircraft ever built’

On July 22, 1955, the XF-84H Thunderscreech underwent its first of 12 test flights at Edwards Air Force Base, California. Almost immediately, the aforementioned issues were noted.

Eleven of the flights ended in emergency landings, with one of the test pilots, Lin Hendrix, refusing to re-enter the cockpit after his first flight, saying, “It never flew over 450 knots indicated, since at that speed, it developed an unhappy practice of ‘snaking,’ apparently losing longitudinal stability.”
The pilots weren’t the only ones affected by the XF-84H’s issues. The amount of noise it emitted also proved to be problematic for those stationed on the ground. Loud enough to be heard from 25 miles away, the aircraft created a sonic boom strong enough to knock down anyone standing close by. On top of that, there were reports of ground crews suffering severe headaches and nausea whenever it took off down the runway.
The “loudest aircraft ever built” also affected the control towers – in particular, sensitive components that were vulnerable to the vibrations produced by its subsonic propellers. This forced crews to communicate with the XF-84H crew along the flight line via light signals.
Given these issues, the Republic XF-84H Thunderscreech never made it past its Phase I proving flights. In September 1956, the Air Force canceled the program. Of the two prototypes, only one survived and is currently on display at the National Museum of the United States Air Force at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base.
Categories
Aircraft

How Did An A-10 Warthog Wind Up With A Cow Kill Marking?

Among the Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt IIs operated by the US Air Force, there’s one that stands out from the rest. The reason? Among its many kill markings is the outline of a cow. This particular aircraft was assigned to the Red Devils of the 107th Fighter Squadron, 127th Wing of the Michigan Air National Guard, and how it came to earn the cow kill marking remains unclear.

Why are there kill markings on A-10 Warthogs?

Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II with a cow kill marking painted on its side
Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II with the 107th Fighter Squadron painted with the World War II-era Red Devil scheme, 2017. Its cow kill marking can be seen toward the front of the aircraft. (Photo Credit: Spc. John Brandenburg / 127th Wing Public Affairs / DVIDS / Public Domain)

Placing kill markings on the side of A-10 Warthogs wasn’t always the norm. The practice only really started in 2017, when it was decided new paint jobs would be done on the 107th Fighter Squadron’s aircraft. They were painted green with devil characters to honor the 100th anniversary of the Red Devils, one of the oldest flying units in the Air Force.

In 2018, the specific A-10 with the cow kill marking could be seen flying during the commemorative flights over the beaches of Normandy, which were conducted in honor of the 74th anniversary of the D-Day landings that occurred on June 6, 1944.

Was the cow collateral damage?

Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II with a cow kill marking painted on its side
Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II with the 107th Fighter Squadron painted with the World War II-era Red Devil scheme, 2017. Its cow kill marking can be seen toward the front of the aircraft. (Photo Credit: Spc. John Brandenburg / 127th Wing Public Affairs / DVIDS / Public Domain)

The most commonly accepted rumor as to how this A-10 got its cow kill marking comes from a Close Air Support (CAS) mission.

It’s believed the pilot was performing a sortie over an enemy village in an undisclosed location in Iraq. Using the aircraft’s GAU-8/A Avenger 30 mm cannon, they attempted to blow away the enemy. However, when ground troops moved in to secure the area and conduct a kill count, they found a cow shredded to pieces by 30 mm ammo.

Penelope Carroll, spokeswoman for the 127th Wing, said the A-10 responsible had “inadvertently” killed the animal during the 107th Fighter Squadron’s deployment in Iraq. About 350 airmen and 12 of the attack aircraft from Selfridge Air National Guard Base, Michigan had been sent to the country and Syria as part of Operation Inherent Resolve in 2015.
While unable to disclose more details about the mission, Carroll did clarify that the cow kill was the result of ordnance, rather than the A-10s iconic “BRRRT” gun.

The cow kill isn’t the only strange marking on an A-10

Four Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt IIs in flight
Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt IIs on a training mission over Michigan, 2016. (Photo Credit: Terry Atwell / 127th Wing Public Affairs / DVIDS / Public Domain)

The strange cow kill marking isn’t the only unexpected one to be present on an A-10 Warthog. There’s another that features markings of both a Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor and a General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon.

The likely origin of these markings is that the attack aircraft belongs to the Air Command A-10 Demo Team. As such, it sports the marks of the F-16 and F-22, as they’re typically the types that fly in formation during airshows. As incredible as the A-10 is, it would likely be difficult for it to actually score hits against F-22s or F-16s.
Categories
Aircraft

The Incredible Discovery of Cold War-Era Avro Arrows At the Bottom of Lake Ontario

Avro Canada’s CF-105 Arrow was a sophisticated aircraft that put the Canadian air industry on the map. The Cold War-era jet interceptor was designed to combat the threat of Soviet bombers, but was ultimately shelved after its budget ballooned to over $1 billion CAD. While little is known about the Avro Arrow, compared to other aircraft from the time period, a 2017 discovery at the bottom of Lake Ontario shed new light on the innovative design.

The Avro Arrow was Canada’s most significant aviation innovation

Crowd gathered around an Avro CF-105 Arrow
Unveiling of the Avro CF-105 Arrow, 1957. (Photo Credit: Robert Lansdale / Federal News Photos / Library and Archives Canada / Wikimedia Commons CC BY 2.0)

The Arvo Arrow was a supersonic jet interceptor built in the 1950s by Avro Canada. A product of the Cold War, the Arrow was developed in response to the growing concern that Soviet bombers could attack North America by flying through the Canadian Arctic. It was built to serve as a nuclear interceptor that could fly higher and faster than other aircraft in its class.

Several manufacturers turned down offers to build the Arrow, since it had very specific requirements, but Avro Canada decided to take advantage of the country’s highly-skilled aviation workforce to make the impossible a reality.

The project was a massive undertaking that spawned the most innovative aviation technology the world had seen. The Arrow was a beast, weighing almost 49,000 pounds when empty and featuring a 50-foot wingspan. It also made history by with the world’s first computerized flight control and weapons systems, and could travel at nearly twice the speed of sound.

The project was ultimately shelved

Avro CF-105 Arrow parked in the snow
Avro CF-105 Arrow. (Photo Credit: Don Rogers / Wikimedia Commons / Public Domain)

The testing process for the Avro Arrow was extensive, relying heavily on wind-tunnel testing and experiments on smaller models. Nine of these were one-eighth the size of the actual aircraft and launched on rockets over Lake Ontario, where many still rest beneath the waves.

The Avro Arrow was unveiled in 1957, and her historic first flight a year later broke not just one but four speed records. Sadly, this high-tech aircraft’s career was cut short when Canadian Prime Minister John Diefenbaker slashed the funding to a number of federal programs. With a price tag of $1.1 billion CAD, the Arrow was definitely costly for a country with a small population and less-extensive military.

The end of the Avro Arrow left over 14,500 workers without a job. All related materials were destroyed, while the nine scale model aircraft were left at the bottom of Lake Ontario.

Searching for an (Avro) Arrow in a haystack

Replica of the Avro CF-105 Arrow on display outside
Replica of the Avro CF-105 Arrow in Barry’s Bay, Ontario. (Photo Credit: Creative Touch Imaging Ltd. / NurPhoto / Getty Images)

In 2017, a new initiative to recover the sunken Avro Arrows from Lake Ontario was launched as part of Canada’s 150-anniversary celebrations. OSISKO Mining Inc. is leading the project with support from OEX Recovery Group Inc., which has used sonar to locate the underwater resting places of the scale model aircraft. The project is being supported by the Canada Aviation Museum, the Royal Canadian Air Force and the Canadian Conservation Institute.

“One of the things we’re not trying to do with this program is to rewrite the history of what happened with the Arvo program,” OSISKO President and CEO John Burzynski told CTV News. “This is simply a search – and ideally, recovery.” He also hopes the project sheds light on the incredible work of the countless people who lost their jobs when the program was canceled.

Finding the submerged Arrows has been no simple task. Originally launched from the Royal Canadian Air Force base in Point Petre, Prince Edward County, the area of Lake Ontario was “littered with targets,” according to Dave Shea from Kraken Robotics. “One of the challenges with this kind of search, it’s not like you’re looking for a needle in a haystack,” he explained. “It’s like you’re looking for a needle in a haystack full of needles.”
In July 2017, it was announced that one of the sunken Avro Arrows had been discovered at the bottom of Lake Ontario, near the city of Kingston – not far from where they were originally launched. The following summer, it was recovered and brought to the surface for the first time in over 60 years.
Since then, another four Arrows have been located.
Categories
Aircraft

Despite Being Prone to Crashing, the Loach Helicopter Was Favored By Pilots In Vietnam

The Hughes OH-6 Cayuse was a revolutionary rotorcraft operated during the Vietnam War. Adopted after the company behind its design deceived the US Army, the “Loach” helicopter, as it was better known, fast became the primary chopper flown in Vietnam. Almost as soon as production began, however, it was replaced by a competitor’s model.

Battling it out for a US Army contract

Factory workers assembling Hughes OH-6A Cayuse helicopters
Production of the Hughes OH-6A Cayuse, 1967. (Photo Credit: Bettmann / Getty Images)

Following the Second World War, significant advancements were made in the field of rotary-wing flight. The Korean War proved the necessity for such rotorcraft, particularly in regard to search and rescue operations.

In 1960, the US Army issued Technical Specification 153 and established the Light Observation Helicopter (LOH) program. This eventually gave way to the “loach” nickname, and was intended to provide the US military with a light-class, rotary-wing craft that could fulfill a number of purposes: search and rescue, close air support, MEDEVAC, observation, transport, reconnaissance and attack roles.

The LOH program opened the floor to several companies to come up with their own designs. The Aircraft Division of Hughes Tool Company came up with the Model 369, which became one of three finalists, alongside designs from Bell Helicopter Company and Fairchild Hiller.

The Model 369, with its Allison T63-A-5A series turboshaft engine, took its first flight on February 27, 1963, under the military designation YOH-6A. During the testing phase, it became clear the Bell prototype was underpowered, so it was dropped. Up against Fairchild Hiller, Hughes Tool Company purposely undervalued its cost estimates, earning the company favor – and the contract.
The Army requested 714 helicopters in May 1965, a number that was later increased to 1,300.

Hughes OH-6 Cayuse specs

Hughes OH-6 Cayuse in flight
Hughes OH-6 Cayuse, 1966. (Photo Credit: Unknown Author / Wikimedia Commons / Public Domain)

The OH-6 Cayuse was built with a rugged structure covered in light aluminum. It had a distinct teardrop-shaped fuselage, which made it instantly recognizable, and a cockpit for two crew members, along with two removable seats in the passenger cabin. It was also the right size to fit the necessary avionics and fuel stores, all while keeping the structure nimble and agile.

Overtop of the fuselage was the OH-6’s single engine, attached to a four-blade main rotor assembly. A shaft ran to the tail and powered the two-blade rotor at the back. Underneath, a fixed twin-skid undercarriage was supported at two separate points.

This simple design made maintenance easy, while the chopper’s 26-foot rotor made it much easier to maneuver in tight landing zones. As well, its tough frame made it safer than other helicopters during crashes, as its aluminum skin absorbed the energy and the structure protected the crew.
With all these benefits, several variations were developed.

Flying the Hughes OH-6 Cayuse over Vietnam

Four US Army soldiers working on a grounded Hughes OH-6 Cayuse
US Army soldiers work on a Hughes OH-6 Cayuse that was shot down in Tây Ninh province, South Vietnam, December 1967. (Photo Credit: BOB WILDAU / AFP / Getty Images)

The OH-6 Cayuse, by this point known as the Loach helicopter, made its way to Vietnam in December 1967. Its effectiveness in battle allowed it to quickly replace the Bell H-13 Siouxs being operated in the country. Each could be equipped with any number of armaments, including grenade launchers, 7.62 mm miniguns, Hydra 70 mm unguided rockets, and TOW and Hellfire anti-tank guided missiles.

While in Vietnam, Loach helicopters operated as part of air mobile teams. They were employed in hunter-killer tactics, wherein they flew low over the jungle as bait to draw enemy fire. When the opposing forces exposed themselves, the crew would call upon an accompanying Bell AH-1 Cobra to attack. Infantrymen would also launch an assault from the ground.

While successful in this respect, the Loach helicopter also had a reputation for being easily gunned down. However, the chopper’s frame ensured the crewmen within remained safe. That’s why the majority of pilots who served in Vietnam shared the opinion that, if you were going to crash, it was best to do it in a Loach.

Hughes Tool Company loses its contract

Hughes YOH-6A Cayuse prototype hovering over a field
Hughes YOH-6A Cayuse prototype. (Photo Credit: U.S. Army / Wikimedia Commons / Public Domain)

While the already-produced OH-6 Cayuses were being deployed to Vietnam in 1967, production costs were beginning to rise. On top of this, Fairchild Hiller lodged a formal complaint over Hughes Tool Company’s deceitful tactics to earn the original contract.

The US Army subsequently reopened the LOH program to engineering companies, offering a new contract for 2,700 additional airframes. Another flight competition was held, this time without a submission from Fairchild Hiller. The Loach helicopter was pitted against what was then known as the Bell Model 206.

In the end, Hughes lost its contract to Bell, who was deemed to have the superior design. The Army officially adopted the Bell OH-58 Kiowa in 1969.

Kawasaki OH-6D

Kawasaki OH-6D in flight
Kawasaki OH-6D. (Photo Credit: 海上自衛隊 / Wikimedia Commons CC BY 4.0)

Kawasaki Heavy Industries produced 387 OH-6D Cayuses under license in Japan. They were operated by a number of military organizations, including the Japanese Army, Navy and Coast Guard. Several Kawasaki-built Loach helicopters were also flown by civilian customers for a variety of reasons, including emergency medical services, law enforcement tasks and for work in the agricultural sector.

160th Aviation Battalion

Hughes OH-6 Cayuse in flight
Hughes OH-6 Cayuse, 2019. (Photo Credit: Airwolfhound / Wikimedia Commons CC BY-SA 2.0)

When the 1980 hostage situation of Operation Eagle Claw was deemed a disaster, the US military realized there was a lack of aircraft and personnel trained for such special operations. In response, a task force was developed – originally designated Task Force 158 – for the next attempt to rescue the hostages, Operation Honey Badger.

For this, a small rotorcraft capable of landing in restrictive locations and easily transportable via US Air Force transport aircraft was necessary. The OH-6A Cayuse fulfilled this role and became known as the “Little Bird.” The pilots tasked with operating the choppers were selected from the 229th Attack Helicopter Battalion. They underwent two weeks of qualification training and an additional two weeks of mission training.

Operation Honey Badger never went ahead, as the hostages were released in January 1981. Instead of disbanding Task Force 158, the military opted to turn it into the 160th Aviation Battalion. The Loach helicopters used to transport personnel were given the designation MH-6, while the armed ones were dubbed the AH-6.

Categories
Aircraft

A B-2 Spirit Was the Victim of the Most Expensive Crash in US Air Force History – $1.4 Billion!

Undoubtedly, the United States has put a large amount of money into its Air Force between improving aerial technology, funding production and, of course, dealing with the financial losses from crashes. There is one incident, in particular, that cost the service more than any other. Known as the 2008 Andersen Air Force Base B-2 Accident, it caused $1.4 billion in damages and saw the loss of a stealth bomber named Spirit of Kansas.

Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit

Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit 'Spirit of Kansas' taking off
Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit named Spirit of Kansas, July 1997. (Photo Credit: Ian Cole / Flickr CC BY-SA 2.0)

The Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit first flew on July 17, 1989, and was introduced into service on January 1, 1997. It was created as part of the Advanced Technology Bomber (ATB) program to serve as both a heavy bomber and a stealth aircraft for gathering intelligence. This was exactly the type of aircraft intended for use during the Cold War, despite it not having a role in the conflict.

The B-2 was technologically advanced, which meant its production costs were incredibly high. Several problems also arose during the development process, which only drove up the price. The US Congress had intended to buy 132 of the bombers. However, only 21 were purchased (at a staggering $737 million per unit), due to the high price tag and the Cold War coming to an end.

One of the B-2s delivered was named Spirit of Kansas.

Spirit of Kansas

Firetrucks parked near the charred remains of the Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit 'Spirit of Kansas'
The remains of the Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit named Spirit of Kansas following the crash at Andersen Air Force Base, Guam, February 2008. (Photo Credit: Federal Aviation Administration / Wikimedia Commons / Public Domain)

Spirit of Kansas was the 12th B-2 Spirit to be built, and joined the US Air Force on February 17, 1995. In 2008, the bomber was in service with the 393rd Bomb Squadron, 509th Bomb Wing, which operated out of Whiteman Air Force Base, Missouri. It’d flown with them for nearly seven months without issue, amassing 5,100 flight hours.

At the time of the crash, Spirit of Kansas had been in Guam for four months, as part of the continued presence of US bombers in the region.

On February 23, 2008, Maj. Ryan Link and Capt. Justin Grieve were supposed to return to Whiteman with “classified material.” Despite having had no prior issues, Spirit of Kansas became difficult to control upon takeoff, with one of its wingtips eventually touching the ground. Fortunately, both pilots were able to eject, and they survived the accident with only minimal hospitalization.

A $1.4 billion crash

First responders standing in front of two fire trucks
Emergency responders who aided in the response effort following the crash of the Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit named Spirit of Kansas at Andersen Air Force Base, Guam, August 2008. (Photo Credit: Airman 1st Class Nichelle Griffiths / US Air Force / Wikimedia Commons / Public Domain)

Spirit of Kansas was another matter, as it was damaged beyond repair. Its wing had completely broken off upon catching the ground, causing the B-2 Spirit to tumble out of control. At it flipped, fuel spilt and caught fire, and very little was salvageable. However, reports say the classified material that was onboard the aircraft was safely returned to where it came from.

The estimated cost of the crash was $1.4 billion. However, the number is much higher when inflation is taken into account.

As Spirit of Kansas was the first B-2 to crash, it caused quite a stir. While an investigation was underway, the Air Force grounded the remaining 20 bombers. Officials determined the cause of the accident wasn’t pilot error – another staff member had forgotten to activate the air pressure heater. The resulting condensation in the air-data sensors, intensified by “heavy, lashing rains,” had made the control system issue a faulty command to pull away from the runway too early.
With the cause of the crash figured out, the B-2 fleet resumed flights on April 15, 2008. While there have been crashes in the years since, Spirit of Kansas remains the only one to have been damaged beyond repair. It remains the most expensive aircraft crash in history.