DOCSLIB.ORG

The Phantom Menace: the F-4 in Air Combat in Vietnam

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Phantom Menace: the F-4 in Air Combat in Vietnam THE PHANTOM MENACE: THE F-4 IN AIR COMBAT IN VIETNAM Michael W. Hankins Thesis Prepared for the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS August 2013 APPROVED: Robert Citino, Major Professor Michael Leggiere, Committee Member Christopher Fuhrmann, Committee Member Richard McCaslin, Chair of the Department of History Mark Wardell, Dean of the Toulouse Graduate School Hankins, Michael W. The Phantom Menace: The F-4 in Air Combat in Vietnam. Master of Science (History), August 2013, 161 pp., 2 illustrations, bibliography, 84 titles. The F-4 Phantom II was the United States' primary air superiority fighter aircraft during the Vietnam War. This airplane epitomized American airpower doctrine during the early Cold War, which diminished the role of air-to-air combat and the air superiority mission. As a result, the F-4 struggled against the Soviet MiG fighters used by the North Vietnamese Air Force. By the end of the Rolling Thunder bombing campaign in 1968, the Phantom traded kills with MiGs at a nearly one-to-one ratio, the worst air combat performance in American history. The aircraft also regularly failed to protect American bombing formations from MiG attacks. A bombing halt from 1968 to 1972 provided a chance for American planners to evaluate their performance and make changes. The Navy began training pilots specifically for air combat, creating the Navy Fighter Weapons School known as "Top Gun" for this purpose. The Air Force instead focused on technological innovation and upgrades to their equipment. The resumption of bombing and air combat in the 1972 Linebacker campaigns proved that the Navy's training practices were effective, while the Air Force's technology changes were not, with kill ratios becoming worse. However, the last three months of the campaign introduced an American ground radar system that proved more effective than Top Gun in improving air-to-air combat performance. By the end of the Vietnam War, the Air Force and Navy overcame the inherent problems with the Phantom, which were mostly of their own making. Copyright 2013 by Michael W. Hankins ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I owe a large debt of gratitude to many people for helping to make this thesis possible. First and foremost, my major professor, Dr. Robert Citino, provided not only valuable insight and advice during the entire writing process, but an infectious enthusiasm for the work of a historian. I have leaned heavily on his guidance during our many conversations about military history, research methods, and rock and roll. The other members of my committee, Dr. Michael Leggiere and Dr. Christopher Fuhrmann, have also been extremely encouraging and helpful throughout my graduate studies, continually making themselves available for answering my many questions about writing, research, and career building. My other professors at The University of North Texas, Dr. Guy Chet, Dr. Richard Lowe, and Dr. Richard McCaslin, have all proven incredibly supportive and valuable to my development. Dr. Peter Lane, not only a great professor but a decorated fighter pilot in Vietnam, also provided very helpful guidance in my research. The staff at the Air Force Historical Research Agency was absolutely invaluable. I cannot overstate my gratitude for their generous help and welcoming attitude. I would like to sincerely thank the administrative staff of the University of North Texas History Department. Their diligence, combined with their tolerance of my many questions has been much appreciated. Likewise, I am extremely grateful to all my fellow graduate students at the University of North Texas for their advice, friendship, and the occasional adult beverage. Specifically, I received exceptional help in editing and proofreading as well as general guidance and inspiration from Luke Truxal, Molly Bundschuh, Megan Winkler, and Ryan English. Finally, I would like to thank my father, David Hankins, for instilling in me a fascination for history, technology, and aviation. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................... iii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION: THE DEATH AND RETURN OF AIR SUPERIORITY ........ 1 CHAPTER 2 ORCHESTRATED CONFUSION: DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE F-4 PHANTOM ............................................................................................................................ 13 Sacrificing Superiority: The Post World War II Air Force....................................................... 15 When is a Fighter Not a Fighter? Navy Doctrine in the Cold War........................................... 22 A Gleam in the Customer's Eye ................................................................................................ 26 A Maelstrom of Design Changes .............................................................................................. 29 Winners and Losers................................................................................................................... 34 Flexible Planes for Flexible Response ...................................................................................... 39 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ 42 CHAPTER 3 A RIFLE IN A PHONE BOOTH: AIR COMBAT DURING ROLLING THUNDER ................................................................................................................................... 45 Waiting To Be Hit: The Opening of Air-To-Air Combat ......................................................... 49 A Real Menace: Growing MiG Aggression .............................................................................. 54 The Electric Trojan Horse: Operation Bolo .............................................................................. 59 The Wheel in the Sky: Changing MiG Tactics ......................................................................... 65 Revenge of The MiGs ............................................................................................................... 72 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ 78 CHAPTER 4 HALFTIME: REEVALUATING TRAINING AND TECHNOLOGY ................ 82 Not a Fighter Pilot Among Them: Training in the Air Force ................................................... 83 iv Airline Captains, Not Fighter Pilots: Training in the Navy ...................................................... 88 Mirror Images and the “Fly Safe” Culture ................................................................................ 91 Know Your Enemy ................................................................................................................... 95 A Time of Reflection ................................................................................................................ 99 Rebuilding the Air Force: We Have the Technology ............................................................. 104 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 111 CHAPTER 5 TAKE WARNING: AIR COMBAT DURING THE LINEBACKER CAMPAIGNS ............................................................................................................................. 114 Nothing to Compare: New Gear, New Men, and New Strategies .......................................... 118 A New Bag of Tricks: Renewed Combat ............................................................................... 129 An Old-Fashioned Butt Kicking ............................................................................................. 133 The Most Effective Show We've Had: Project Teaball .......................................................... 135 Caught in the Apocalypse: Linebacker II ............................................................................... 142 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 146 CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSION: THE FAILED EXPERIMENT ................................................. 149 APPENDIX: LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................... 154 BIBLIOGRAPHY ....................................................................................................................... 156 v CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION: THE DEATH AND RETURN OF AIR SUPERIORITY Many consider the F-4 Phantom II to be one of the greatest fighter planes ever built.1 Yet by a strict definition, it was hardly a fighter plane at all. With its large size and poor maneuverability, it carries few of the traditional hallmarks of successful air superiority fighters. 1 “It is impossible to gather enough superlatives into one book to adequately describe the McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II,” states Lou Drendel in the introduction to Lou Drendel, USAF Phantoms in Combat (Carrollton, TX: Squadron/Signal Publications, 1987). This publisher produced a line of books that highlight the Phantom in similar terms. Other books in the same vein consist of encyclopedic works focusing on the technical aspects of the Phantom and other aircraft. The best of these include Lou Drendel, F-4 Phantom II in Action (Warren, MI: Squadron/Signal Publications, 1972); Lou Drendel, The Air War in Vietnam (New York: Arco Publishing, 1968); Lou Drendel, Air War Over Southeast Asia: A Pictorial Record (Carrollton,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Economic Impact of Arizona's Principal Military Operations
    Economic Impact Of Arizona’s Principal Military Operations 2008 Prepared by In collaboration with Final Report TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Chapter One INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND AND STUDY 1 METHODOLOGY Chapter Two DESCRIPTIONS OF ARIZONA’S PRINCIPAL 11 MILITARY OPERATIONS Chapter Three EMPLOYMENT AND SPENDING AT ARIZONA’S 27 PRINCIPAL MILITARY OPERATIONS Chapter Four ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF ARIZONA’S PRINCIPAL 32 MILITARY OPERATIONS Chapter Five STATE AND LOCAL TAX REVENUES DERIVED FROM 36 ARIZONA’S PRINCIPAL MILITARY OPERATIONS Chapter Six COMPARISONS TO THE MILITARY INDUSTRY IN 38 ARIZONA Chapter Seven COMPARISONS OF THE MILITARY INDUSTRY IN FY 43 2000 AND FY 2005 APPENDICES Appendix One HOW IMPLAN WORKS A-1 Appendix Two RETIREE METHODOLOGY A-6 Appendix Three ECONOMETRIC MODEL INPUTS A-7 Appendix Four DETAILED STATEWIDE MODEL OUTPUT A-19 Appendix Five REGIONAL IMPACT INFORMATION A-22 The Maguire Company ESI Corporation LIST OF TABLES Page Table 3-1 Summary of Basic Personnel Statistics 27 Arizona’s Major Military Operations Table 3-2 Summary of Military Retiree Statistics 28 Arizona Principal Military Operations Table 3-3 Summary of Payroll and Retirement Benefits 30 Arizona’s Major Military Operations Table 3-4 Summary of Spending Statistics 31 Arizona’s Major Military Operations Table 4-1 Summary of Statewide Economic Impacts 34 Arizona’s Major Military Operations Table 5-1 Summary of Statewide Fiscal Impacts 37 Arizona’s Military Industry Table 5-2 Statewide Fiscal Impacts 37 Arizona’s Military Industry Table 6-1 Comparison of Major Industries / Employers in Arizona 41 Table 7-1 Comparison of Military Industry Employment in 43 FY 2000 and FY 2005 Table 7-2 Comparison of Military Industry Economic Output in 43 FY 2000 and FY 2005 The Maguire Company ESI Corporation Arizona’s Principal Military Operations Acknowledgements We wish to acknowledge and thank the leadership and personnel of the various military operations included within this study.
    [Show full text]
  • From 1964 to 1973, the Air Force Paid a Terrible Price in Lives and Aircraft
    From 1964 to 1973, the Air Force paid a terrible price in lives and aircraft. Scherbakov/RIA Novosti photo The CruCible of VieTnam or the past four decades, the The airspace over Vietnam was a Above: The wreckage of a US Navy A-6 Air Force has lost relatively lethal environment for airmen. At times, Intruder draws a crowd of North Viet- namese in 1968. USAF’s aircraft losses few aircraft in combat. This the USAF advantage in air-to-air com- were devastating, and the Navy and level of combat success was bat slipped perilously close to parity. Marine Corps also lost many aircraft. not always the norm. Airmen paid the price in aircraft down, Right: An F-105 “Thud” crash-lands at FAs recently as the Vietnam War, USAF lives lost, and survivors taken prisoner. Udorn RTAB, Thailand, in 1967. Forty and the United States struggled to control Overall, USAF lost 2,254 fixed percent of the F-105 inventory was lost during the war. the air, failed to achieve safety from wing aircraft from February 1962 to enemy air defenses, and struggled to October 1973 in the Southeast Asia overcome an adversary air force. Many theater of operations. Some 1,737 for a week to pass without an aircraft of the problems were self-inflicted, but fixed wing aircraft were combat losses, lost in combat operations. the fact remains that the years 1964 to and another 517 aircraft went down in Some of the cumulative totals were 1973 were tremendously difficult for related noncombat operations. Losses shocking: The Air Force lost 40 per- the Air Force and American airpower.
    [Show full text]
  • P-38 Lightning
    P-38 Lightning P-38 Lightning Type Heavy fighter Manufacturer Lockheed Designed by Kelly Johnson Maiden flight 27 January 1939 Introduction 1941 Retired 1949 Primary user United States Army Air Force Produced 1941–45 Number built 10,037[1] Unit cost US$134,284 when new[2] Variants Lockheed XP-49 XP-58 Chain Lightning The Lockheed P-38 Lightning was a World War II American fighter aircraft. Developed to a United States Army Air Corps requirement, the P-38 had distinctive twin booms with forward-mounted engines and a single, central nacelle containing the pilot and armament. The aircraft was used in a number of different roles, including dive bombing, level bombing, ground strafing, photo reconnaissance missions,[3] and extensively as a long-range escort fighter when equipped with droppable fuel tanks under its wings. The P-38 was used most extensively and successfully in the Pacific Theater of Operations and the China-Burma-India Theater of Operations, where it was flown by the American pilots with the highest number of aerial victories to this date. The Lightning called "Marge" was flown by the ace of aces Richard Bong who earned 40 victories. Second with 38 was Thomas McGuire in his aircraft called "Pudgy". In the South West Pacific theater, it was a primary fighter of United States Army Air Forces until the appearance of large numbers of P-51D Mustangs toward the end of the war. [4][5] 1 Design and development Lockheed YP-38 (1943) Lockheed designed the P-38 in response to a 1937 United States Army Air Corps request for a high- altitude interceptor aircraft, capable of 360 miles per hour at an altitude of 20,000 feet, (580 km/h at 6100 m).[6] The Bell P-39 Airacobra and the Curtiss P-40 Warhawk were also designed to meet the same requirements.
    [Show full text]
  • Aircraft Collection
    A, AIR & SPA ID SE CE MU REP SEU INT M AIRCRAFT COLLECTION From the Avenger torpedo bomber, a stalwart from Intrepid’s World War II service, to the A-12, the spy plane from the Cold War, this collection reflects some of the GREATEST ACHIEVEMENTS IN MILITARY AVIATION. Photo: Liam Marshall TABLE OF CONTENTS Bombers / Attack Fighters Multirole Helicopters Reconnaissance / Surveillance Trainers OV-101 Enterprise Concorde Aircraft Restoration Hangar Photo: Liam Marshall BOMBERS/ATTACK The basic mission of the aircraft carrier is to project the U.S. Navy’s military strength far beyond our shores. These warships are primarily deployed to deter aggression and protect American strategic interests. Should deterrence fail, the carrier’s bombers and attack aircraft engage in vital operations to support other forces. The collection includes the 1940-designed Grumman TBM Avenger of World War II. Also on display is the Douglas A-1 Skyraider, a true workhorse of the 1950s and ‘60s, as well as the Douglas A-4 Skyhawk and Grumman A-6 Intruder, stalwarts of the Vietnam War. Photo: Collection of the Intrepid Sea, Air & Space Museum GRUMMAN / EASTERNGRUMMAN AIRCRAFT AVENGER TBM-3E GRUMMAN/EASTERN AIRCRAFT TBM-3E AVENGER TORPEDO BOMBER First flown in 1941 and introduced operationally in June 1942, the Avenger became the U.S. Navy’s standard torpedo bomber throughout World War II, with more than 9,836 constructed. Originally built as the TBF by Grumman Aircraft Engineering Corporation, they were affectionately nicknamed “Turkeys” for their somewhat ungainly appearance. Bomber Torpedo In 1943 Grumman was tasked to build the F6F Hellcat fighter for the Navy.
    [Show full text]
  • IB81107: Bomber Options for Replacing B-52S
    BOMBER OPTIONS FOR REPLACING B-52s ISSUE BRIEF NUMBER IB81107 AUTHOR: Mitchell, Douglas D. Foreign Affairs and National Defense Division THE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE MAJOR ISSUES SYSTEM ' DATE ORIGINATED 06/17/81 DATE UPDATED 05/03/82 FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION CALL 287-5700 0528 CRS- 1 ISSUE DEFINITION To deter a nuclear attack against this country and its allies, the United States maintains a strategic force of land-based missiles (ICBMs), submarine-based missiles (SLBMs), and bombers. The bomber leg of this "triad" primarily consists of about 343 B-52 bombers operated by the Strategic Air Command (SAC). Many believe that by 1990, the B-52's vulnerability to improving Soviet air defenses will imperil its effectiveness as a penetrating bomber. There is strong sentiment in Congress and in the Department of Defense to replace the B-52s before that time. The FY81 Defense Authorization Act (P.L. 96-342) directed the Secretary of Defense to develop a "multi-role bomber" for initial deployment by 1987. Candidate aircraft were to include the B-1, a derivative of the B-1, the FB-111B/C, and an advanced technology aircraft, which would incorporate "Stealth.'' Months before the choice of aircraft was announced, the new Reagan Administration added $2.4 billion to the FY82 defense budget, to initiate a bomber procurement and research and development program called Long Range Combat Aircraft (LRCA). In a long-awaited announcement on Oct. 2, 1981, President Reagan designated a modified B-1 -- also known as the B-1B -- as the aircraft to be built for LRCA.
    [Show full text]
  • F—18 Navy Air Combat Fighter
    74 /2 >Af ^y - Senate H e a r tn ^ f^ n 12]$ Before the Committee on Appro priations (,() \ ER WIIA Storage ime nts F EB 1 2 « T H e -,M<rUN‘U«sni KAN S A S S F—18 Na vy Air Com bat Fighter Fiscal Year 1976 th CONGRESS, FIRS T SES SION H .R . 986 1 SPECIAL HEARING F - 1 8 NA VY AIR CO MBA T FIG H TER HEARING BEFORE A SUBC OMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE NIN ETY-FOURTH CONGRESS FIR ST SE SS IO N ON H .R . 9 8 6 1 AN ACT MAKIN G APP ROPR IA TIO NS FO R THE DEP ARTM EN T OF D EFEN SE FO R T H E FI SC AL YEA R EN DI NG JU N E 30, 1976, AND TH E PE RIO D BE GIN NIN G JU LY 1, 1976, AN D EN DI NG SEPT EM BER 30, 1976, AND FO R OTH ER PU RP OSE S P ri nte d fo r th e use of th e Com mittee on App ro pr ia tio ns SPECIAL HEARING U.S. GOVERNM ENT PRINT ING OFF ICE 60-913 O WASHINGTON : 1976 SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS JOHN L. MCCLELLAN, Ark ans as, Chairman JOH N C. ST ENN IS, Mississippi MILTON R. YOUNG, No rth D ako ta JOH N O. P ASTORE, Rhode Island ROMAN L. HRUSKA, N ebraska WARREN G. MAGNUSON, Washin gton CLIFFORD I’. CASE, New Je rse y MIK E MANSFIEL D, Montana HIRAM L.
    [Show full text]
  • Best Practices Study 2014
    Military Installation and Mission Support Best Practices (25 States / 20 Communities) Prepared for: Florida Defense Support Task Force (FDSTF) Submitted: December 23, 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS TITLE PAGE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................... iii BEST PRACTICES REPORT Purpose ................................................................................................................................ 1 States/ Communities ........................................................................................................... 1 Project Participants ............................................................................................................. 2 Methodology ....................................................................................................................... 2 Sources ................................................................................................................................ 3 Findings ............................................................................................................................... 4 STATES 1. Florida .............................................................................................................................. 18 2. Alabama ............................................................................................................................ 26 3. Alaska ..............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • COMSEC Monitoring and Analysis, Though NSA Exerted Some Influence Through Its Annual Review of the Consolidated Cryptologic Program and Other Measures
    SOUTH EAST AS IA Part One THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CODEWORD MATERIAL TOP SECRET NOFORN TOP SECRET UMBRA NOf?OltN CRYPTOLOGIC HISTORY SERIES SOUTHEAST ASIA Working Against the Tide (COM SEC Monitoring and Analysis) PART ONE (b) (3)-P.L. 86-36 Hiram M. Wolfe, I II, ASA Raymond P. Schmidt, NAVSECGRU Thomas N. Thompson, AFSS June 1970 TOP ~t:Cltt:T U~IBftA NOf?OftN SECURITY NOTICE Although the information contained in this journal ranges in security classification from UNCLASSIFIED to TOP SECRET CODEWORD, the overall security classification assigned to this issue is TOP SECRET UMBRA. The "No Foreign Nations" (NOFORN) caveat has been added to guard against inadvertent disclosure of portions of the text which discuss topics normally held to NOFORN channels. While the TSCW NOFORN classification by itself requires careful handling, additional caution should be exercised with regard to the present journal and others in the series because of the comprehensive treatment and broad range of the subject matter. TOP SECRET UMBRA HOFORH ---.--------- ------. -- 'f'Of S:EERE'f' UMBRA normm CRYPTOLOGIC HISTORY SERIES Southeast Asia Sponsors Vice Adm. Noel Gayler, USN Director, NSA Maj. Gen. Charles). Denholm, USA Commanding General. USASA Rear Adm. Ralph E. Cook, USN Commander, NAVSECGRU Maj. Gen. Carl W. Stapleton, USAF Commander, AFSS Joint Staff Juanita M. Moody Chief William D. Gerhard General Editor Lawton L. Sternbeck, ASA Hiram M. Wolfe, III ASA Raymond P. Schmidt NAVSECGRU Bob W. Rush, AFSS Thomas N. Thompson AFSS Mary Ann Bacon Editor 'fOF 3:ECR:E'f UMBRA HOFORPf 'fOP SECRE'f UMBRA ?WFORN Foreword Important as it is in peacetime, communications security becomes even more important in wartime.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Navy (USN) Mandatory Declassification Review (MDR) Request Logs, 2009-2017
    Description of document: United States Navy (USN) Mandatory Declassification Review (MDR) request logs, 2009-2017 Requested date: 12-July-2017 Release date: 12-October-2017 Posted date: 03-February-2020 Source of document: Department of the Navy - Office of the Chief of Naval Operations FOIA/Privacy Act Program Office/Service Center ATTN: DNS 36 2000 Navy Pentagon Washington DC 20350-2000 Email:: [email protected] The governmentattic.org web site (“the site”) is a First Amendment free speech web site, and is noncommercial and free to the public. The site and materials made available on the site, such as this file, are for reference only. The governmentattic.org web site and its principals have made every effort to make this information as complete and as accurate as possible, however, there may be mistakes and omissions, both typographical and in content. The governmentattic.org web site and its principals shall have neither liability nor responsibility to any person or entity with respect to any loss or damage caused, or alleged to have been caused, directly or indirectly, by the information provided on the governmentattic.org web site or in this file. The public records published on the site were obtained from government agencies using proper legal channels. Each document is identified as to the source. Any concerns about the contents of the site should be directed to the agency originating the document in question. GovernmentAttic.org is not responsible for the contents of documents published on the website. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS 2000 NAVY PENTAGON WASHINGTON, DC 20350-2000 5720 Ser DNS-36RH/17U105357 October 12, 2017 Sent via email to= This is reference to your Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request dated July 12, 2017.
    [Show full text]
  • Victory! Victory Over Japan Day Is the Day on Which Japan Surrendered in World War II, in Effect Ending the War
    AugustAAuugugusstt 201622001166 BRINGING HISTORY TO LIFE See pages 24-26! Victory! Victory over Japan Day is the day on which Japan surrendered in World War II, in effect ending the war. The term has been applied to both of the days on which the initial announcement of Japan’s surrender was made – to the afternoon of August 15, 1945, in Japan, and, because of time zone differences, to August 14, 1945. AmericanAmerican servicemenservicemen andand womenwomen gathergather inin frontfront ofof “Rainbow“Rainbow Corner”Corner” RedRed CrossCross clubclub inin ParisParis toto celebratecelebrate thethe unconditionalunconditional surrendersurrender ofof thethe Japanese.Japanese. 1515 AugustAugust 19451945 Over 200 NEW & RESTOCK Items Inside These Pages! • PLASTICPPLAASSSTTIIC MODELM KITS • MODEL ACCESSORIES • BOOKS & MAGAZINES • PAINTS & TOOLS • GIFTS & COLLECTIBLES See back cover for full details. Order Today at WWW.SQUADRON.COM or call 1-877-414-0434 August Cover Version 1.indd 1 7/7/2016 1:02:36 PM Dear Friends One of the most important model shows this year is taking place in Columbia, South Carolina in August…The IPMS Nationals. SQUADRON As always, the team from Squadron will be there to meet you. We look forward to this event because it gives us a chance to PRODUCTS talk to you all in person. It is the perfect time to hear any sugges- tions you might have so we can serve you even better. If you are at the Nationals, please stop by our booth to say hello. We can’t wait to meet you and hear all about your hobby experi- ences. On top of that, you’ll receive a Squadron shopping bag NEW with goodies! Our booth number is 819.
    [Show full text]
  • Newsletter 0804-1.Pub
    Fourth Quarter (Oct - Dec) 2008 Volume 21, Number 4 The Newsletter of the War Eagles Air Museum Editorial ortunately for aviation enthusi- asts, the global inventory of war- F birds includes flying examples of many of the world’s most significant combat aircraft. There are exceptions, of course. For example, pending restoration of the Commemorative Air Force’s B-29 Fifi, there is currently no airworthy Boe- ing Superfortress. Many of the more ob- scure German and Japanese aircraft types used in World War II do not exist at all. England, whose aircraft industry over the years has built some of the most interest- ing aircraft ever to fly, has a regrettable habit of cutting these historic treasures up for scrap. Thus it is very exciting news that, after a Herculean worldwide fund- raising and restoration effort, there is to- day a flying example of perhaps the most famous post-War British aircraft of all— S The Soviet Union built more than 13,100 the Avro Vulcan. Mikoyan Gurevich MiG-15s, and many more Development of the Vulcan began in Featured Aircraft were made under license by Czechoslovakia, 1947 at the A.V. Roe (Avro) factory, near Poland and China. In this photo from June Manchester, England. The Air Ministry’s ow does one decide how much 1989, the late John MacGuire pilots his two- specification called for a heavy, high-alti- influence an aircraft design has seater ex-Polish Air Force MiG-15UTI Mid- tude, high-speed, long-range bomber to on other aircraft? When you re- get over the southern New Mexico desert H near the new War Eagles Air Museum.
    [Show full text]
  • Fight for the Northwestern Islands September-December 1951 by Michael E
    Chinese crewmen pose in front of one of the Soviet-made Tu-2 Bat bombers that survived the disastrous daylight attack on Taehwa-do on 30 November 1951. Fight for the Northwestern Islands September-December 1951 by Michael E. Krivdo This article provides greater detail on the events of the base on Taehwa-do. Little more than a week later, on fight for the guerrilla-held northwest islands. The ‘Battle 15 November, eleven enemy bombers hit friendly positions of Taehwa-do,’ as some books refer to it, reflected the new on Taehwa-do in a daylight attack to soften them up for an interest that Far East Command (FEC) placed on keeping assault. The commander of Task Force (TF) TAEHWA-DO, those islands under friendly control. It reveals how the British second lieutenant (2LT) Leo S. Adams-Acton (earlier important those islands were for FEC elements that used on Operation SPITFIRE), quickly discerned the pattern them as a base for gaining early warning and intelligence on and directed his guerrillas to improve their defensive the enemy. As seen in other articles in this issue, possession positions. Adams-Acton also reported the developments of the northwest islands provided the FEC with safe areas to his commander at TF LEOPARD on Paengnyong Island, where rescue assets like helicopters and boats could be requesting naval gunfire and air support assets to help him employed to recover downed pilots or aircrew.1 As a result defend against the impending attack. The British Destroyer of the fight for control of those islands, FEC reorganized its HMS Cossack (D-57) proceeded to the island and Air Force forces to better defend the islands in the future and island planners prepared their own surprise for the Chinese.2 defense became an implied task for all guerrilla units.
    [Show full text]