Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

CVW-7 Completes History-Making Missile Shoot
Navy Newsstand ^ | 3/17/2004 11:17:00 AM | Tracey Goff

Posted on 03/17/2004 11:46:39 AM PST by Excuse_My_Bellicosity

USS GEORGE WASHINGTON, At Sea (NNS) -- Launching from USS George Washington's (CVN 73) flight deck on the afternoon of Feb. 25, aircraft from Carrier Air Wing (CVW) 7 fired 17 live missiles onto a range over the Arabian Sea in two separate waves.

The history-making missile exercise took place during a routine deployment for the George Washington Strike Group, deployed in support of Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom.

The ordnance was delivered by Fighter Squadrons (VF) 11 and 143 flying F-14B Tomcats, and Strike Fighter Squadrons (VFA) 131 and 136 in F/A-18C Hornets. Clearing the way for the fighter jets were the E2-C Hawkeye pilots of Airborne Early Warning Squadron (VAW) 121 and Sea Control Squadron (VS) 31 in the S-3B Viking.

Each squadron had its own responsibility to ensure a safe and successful exercise. A total of four F-14s and four F/A-18s left the ship in two separate waves on what may be one of the last live missile exercises for the F-14 Tomcat, which proved it could still deliver a lethal blow to enemy targets.

“The theory was to prove that even though the Phoenix has been in the inventory for more than two decades, they are still capable of projecting power and showing that they remain a very viable option in the air-to-air regime,” said Lt.j.g. Matt Tallyn of VF-143 "Pukin' Dogs.”

The Hornets provided the targets. “We dropped two of the three tactical air launch decoys, or TALDs,” said Lt. Brian Larmon of VFA-131 "Wildcats." “It’s a type of ordnance that glides. It simulates the profile of an aircraft we would be shooting at. It can be set up to turn or go straight. We can pick it up on radar and shoot it.”

Once the Hornets dropped the TALDs, it was time for history to be made. The Tomcats and the Hornets fired their missiles: a total of 16 Phoenix missiles from the Tomcats and one Sparrow from the Hornets.

“It’s very rare that you’ll see eight Phoenix missiles shot off at the same time,” said Tallyn, a radar intercept officer in the second wave of aircraft. “They all worked perfectly, exactly as they were designed. We were excited and thrilled that we were able to go out there and prove that the system is fully functional, and get eight picture-perfect missile shoots. That’s as much as you can ask from a missile shoot.”

VF-11 "Red Ripper" Lt. Garrett Shook agreed. “It was a once-in-a-career opportunity for me, because we shot two at a time, which is pretty rare. In one hour, I doubled the number of missiles I’ve shot in my career.”

Lt. j.g. Mike Manicchia of VFA-136 got the rush of shooting the Sparrow. “It’s pretty out of the ordinary. We get to drop plenty of bombs at practice targets, but not fire missiles. That’s something we never do. Most guys might get to shoot one missile on their first sea tour, so this is a big deal.”

Working out the intricacies of a tactical exercise of this magnitude does not happen overnight. Lt. Mike Burks, the air-to-air weapons training officer from VF-11 who planned the missile exercise, said it was only through a culmination of efforts that this mission was a success.

“It was about a three-week process from start to finish,” he said. “It required the coordination of assets from all the squadrons in the air wing, as well as reserving both the air space and the sea space for the missile exercise."

Once the range was clear, it was time to let the beasts off the ship, or in this case, the Tomcats, the Hornets, the Sparrow and the Phoenix.

“The Hawkeyes and the Vikings were out there about three hours before the exercise began, clearing the space and establishing a good picture for all of us back here so we could start to build a game plan,” said Burks. “By the time the missile shoot was launched, we had a very good idea of what the sea space and air space looked like, so we didn’t encounter problems with range foulers.”

“We provide overall safety and a digital picture of what the battle space looks like,” said VAW-121's Air Control Officer, Lt. Chris Barker. “We paint a picture of the area with our over-the-horizon radar.”

This technology is used to make sure the area is clear of any civilian traffic, or range foulers, which could slow down or halt the exercise. “We ensured there were no commercial airliners or any ships that are non-military, such as cargo ships and oil tankers, in the area of the missile exercise,” Barker said. “If there are, we then provide steering courses for the S-3s to relay to the ships.”

The VS-31 "Topcats" then used their aircraft’s unique ability to fly low and slow as a means of contacting ships straying into the reserved sea space. “We are in charge of range clearance,” said Lt.j.g. Brad Beall, a naval flight officer for the "Topcats." "We call them on a maritime common frequency to let them know they are in a military live fire exercise. We ask them to alter their course and get them out of danger.”

But the aviators are quick to mention they couldn’t do it without the help of other ship and squadron personnel. The squadron's ordnance personnel got a unique opportunity to use the skills they've trained so hard to hone. “They get to load live ordnance that they don’t usually get to see,” said Manicchia.

“There are always a lot of people that go and really make it work," Tallyn said. "We tell them this is what you do all the hard work for; this is why it’s so important to keep doing it. We’re just the ones who pull the trigger.”

Once all the aircraft returned to the ship, the reality of the accomplishment set in. “You really only get one opportunity to do this,” said Burks. “Making sure all the players know their role is the number one key to a good missile exercise. It’s a matter of briefing everybody and making sure that all the players know their responsibilities and also all the back-up plans so if we need to move to a back-up plan, it’s smooth and efficient, and people aren’t having to ask a lot of questions.”

Shook backed Burks up. “For a missile exercise, it went real smooth. The coordination, the planning and the cooperation between squadrons all went smooth enough to get the missiles off on the first try.

“When we do a missile exercise from the beach, we’ll probably fly the missiles without shooting them at least once. We’ll practice once, then go out and shoot it. We’d never flown the missiles before. We’d never practiced the scenario. We just briefed it, and then went out and did it. It was real successful.”

For related news, visit the USS George Washington (CVN 73) Navy NewsStand page at www.news.navy.mil/local/cvn73.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: fleetdefender; hornets; miltech; phoenix; pukindogs; tomcats; usn; ussgeorgewashington; utah
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-46 last
To: Excuse_My_Bellicosity
A loaded SuperHornet couldnt break Mach 1 if you strapped a Mach 5 Phoenix to it and fired the rocket.

The SuperHornet is a jobs program, not a weapons program.
41 posted on 03/18/2004 5:21:28 PM PST by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Pukin Dog
The Navy is going ahead with plans for KF-18 and EF-18 variants. If I were in the White House, I'd be taking a long hard look at the people I have in the Pentagon, who are stupid enough to take an eleborate Boeing sales pitch at face value while dismissing any naysayers as "not being team players".

This is a classic example of what happens when you have management that was educated in business school. They think they can apply the latest Deming-style management fad to aerospace engineering and they won't listen to anybody who says something won't work. It's not always bad to think outside the box (apologies for the cliche), but there needs to be some basis in reality.

42 posted on 03/18/2004 7:53:13 PM PST by Excuse_My_Bellicosity (All the good taglines are taken.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Excuse_My_Bellicosity
Can you say
McNamara?
43 posted on 03/18/2004 9:18:35 PM PST by quietolong
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: quietolong
Yep, sounds like somebody went to the McNamara school of management. The Pentagon people who think that the F-18 can serve as a refueler and EW platform are off in the night. If I were in charge, I would be looking at piss-testing some senior people. Maybe they're taking bribes or being just plain stupid.

I'd like to quote and article written by Bob Kress and Rear Adm. Paul Gillcrist:

"The F-14 will be replaced by the F/A-18E Super Hornet, which attempts deep-interdiction missions. Though it's a whizzy little airshow performer with a nice, modern cockpit, it has only 36 percent of the F-14's payload/range capability. The F/A-18E Super Hornet has been improved but still has, at best, 50 percent of the F-14's capability to deliver a fixed number of bombs (in pounds) on target. This naturally means that the carrier radius of influence drops to 50 percent of what it would have been with the same number of F-14s. As a result, the area of influence (not radius) drops to 23 percent! No wonder the USN is working on “buddy tanker” versions of the Super Hornet.

"By the way, now that the A-6 tanker has gone, how will the Hornets get to deep-interdiction targets? Contrary to what we're officially told, a tanker variant of the Hornet is simply not the answer. In an attempt to make it supersonic, the F-18E has been given a low aspect ratio, razor blade of a wing. This hurts subsonic drag and carrier takeoff payload when compared with a KA-6 tanker, which is an aerodynamically efficient solution. Equally silly is the proposal for an EW version of the F-18E. The same aerodynamic reasons apply for this airplane, plus it has an external stores dilemma. To get sufficient range to support a deep-interdiction mission, the EF-18E would have to use up precious external store stations with fuel tanks rather than ECM pods as carried on the EA-6B. Perhaps the Navy should consider putting the EA-6B back into upgraded and modernized production and build some of them as tankers? Or more Super A-6s?"

44 posted on 03/19/2004 5:37:35 AM PST by Excuse_My_Bellicosity (All the good taglines are taken.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Pukin Dog; quietolong; Pan_Yans Wife
I've been attending SAE's Aerospace Landing Gear conference this week. The latest word is that the Super Hornet, in addition to its other horrendous problems, are having major wheel & brake issues including numerous brake fires. It's pretty late in the program to be having these kinds of issues.

I've also talked to several individuals privately who have told me that NAVAIR is positively stoned to think that the Super Hornet can fly the Tomcat's fleet defense missions, as well as be effective in electronic warfare and refueling missions. The Super Hornet has major unsolved aerodynamic issues and is the slowest fighter programmed since the early 1960's.

45 posted on 03/24/2004 5:11:16 AM PST by Excuse_My_Bellicosity (All the good taglines are taken.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Excuse_My_Bellicosity
I can hardly talk about the Super Hornet without getting upset, so I'll just say that it is worse than you describe. I still predict that in the 11th hour, someone is going to have sense enough to save the Tomcat.
46 posted on 03/24/2004 6:19:10 AM PST by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-46 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson