The Air Force's 'Destroyer' was based on a Navy classic - We Are The Mighty
MIGHTY TACTICAL

The Air Force’s ‘Destroyer’ was based on a Navy classic

The word ‘destroyer’ is usually heard in a naval context. We think about the ships built by the hundreds during World War II to defeat Nazi Germany and Japan. However, the Air Force operated a destroyer for a while, too. Unlike others, this destroyer flew, but like others, it did have a Navy connection.


The Air Force’s ‘Destroyer’ was based on a Navy classic
Douglas B-66B Destroyer takes off (S/N 53-505). Note the landing gear is about halfway through the retract cycle and the altitude is roughly 5 feet. (U.S. Air Force photo)

That plane was the Douglas B-66 Destroyer. When it was first proposed, the plane was meant to be a minimally-altered variant of what was then known as the A3D Skywarrior (and later the A-3). But while the Navy didn’t want ejection seats for the Skywarrior (leading to the A3D earning the nickname, “All Three Dead”), the Air Force did.

The installation of ejection seats was the first of many changes that would eventually transform the B-66 from a simple adaptation job to an almost completely new plane by the time it entered service in 1956.

The Air Force’s ‘Destroyer’ was based on a Navy classic
Most of the B-66 variants were RB-66 Destroyers that specialized in reconnaissance roles. (USAF photo)

Most of the planes built, though, were not the originally-envisioned tactical bombers — the Air Force did acquire 72 B-66Bs, but they also took on five RB-66A testbeds, 145 RB-66Bs, 36 RB-66Cs, and 36 WB-66Ds. Though all were designed slightly differently, many of these variants served in reconnaissance roles. Some of the B-66s and RB-66s were converted into jammers and became EB-66s, key components to electronic warfare in the skies over Vietnam.

One EB-66 with the callsign BAT 21 would later be shot down, leading to one of the most costly rescue missions ever, for which a Navy SEAL was awarded the Medal of Honor and a member of the South Vietnamese military earned a Navy Cross.

The Air Force’s ‘Destroyer’ was based on a Navy classic
Douglas WB-66D Destroyer in flight (S/N 55-391). Photo taken in January 1959. (U.S. Air Force photo)

The last B-66 models were retired in 1975. The Air Force’s destroyer didn’t quite mark two decades in service, but it held the line in various electronic warfare roles until planes like the EF-111 Raven and the F-4G Wild Weasel reached the flight lines.

Learn more about this plane in the video below.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cteY1A4BA10
Articles

Service branches and elite units are testing a 60-round drum

LAS VEGAS — A compact polymer drum magazine from Magpul that can hold 60 rounds is being tested for potential use by several U.S. military service branches, as well as elite units, the company’s director of government and international affairs said.


Tray Ardese would not specify which branches and commands are testing the PMAG D-60 drum, but said range testing by the services so far appears to be going well.

Related: The Marine Corps has ordered Leathernecks to use PMAGs for their rifles

“We’re under kind of a handshake [non-disclosure agreement] right now to let them get their tests in so we don’t put a lot of pressure on them,” Ardese told Military.com at SHOT Shot on Tuesday. “But each branch of the service has at least a few of them. It is a solution right now that could save lives.”

The Air Force’s ‘Destroyer’ was based on a Navy classic
Image via Magpul

Magpul appears at the show after a major coup: The Marine Corps’ decision in December to approve the company’s high-performing Generation M3 PMAG as the only magazine authorized for use in combat, replacing the legacy metal magazine.

Ardese said Magpul hopes the ruggedness, balance and reliability of the drum will also win over military users.

“I was one of the biggest drum haters in the world until I saw this one,” said Ardese, a retired Marine colonel. “Because … they’d work great when you treated them with care, but the second you got them dirty or beat them around, they would stop on you. This one hasn’t stopped on me yet and I’ve shot a lot of rounds through it, and I’ve seen thousands and thousands and thousands of rounds shot through it. It runs flawlessly.”

The drum, at 7.4 inches in length, is designed to be no longer than a traditional 30-round magazine, so shooters in the prone position don’t have to adjust their positioning to fire. And it’s compatible with all the weapons that can accept the PMAG, although Ardese said the drum is particularly well suited to the Marines’ M27 infantry automatic rifle.

The Air Force’s ‘Destroyer’ was based on a Navy classic
Magpul’s 60-round drum is currently undergoing range tests by the U.S. military. | Image via Magpul

The Corps is currently undergoing experimentation to determine whether more infantrymen should be issued the IAR in place of the M4 as their standard service rifle. The weapon has a slightly longer effective range than the M4 carbine and has features including a free-floating barrel that make it more accurate. And unlike the standard M4, it includes a fully automatic mode. Currently, each Marine infantry fire team is equipped with one IAR, carried by the team’s automatic rifleman.

“M27 is the perfect platform for this magazine. This magazine gives the IAR gunner, the automatic rifleman an advantage in volume of fire right off the bat if they were ambushed or they were hit,” Ardese said. “They immediately have two magazines’ worth of ammunition in a flawlessly feeding drum that is very well balanced. It is a must for the IAR gunner.”

The drum, he said, lends itself to any situation where a warfighter needs to have a lot of ammunition at the ready.

“It would be great for vehicle interdiction, any place you would need a large volume of firepower right now,” he said.

It’s not clear when the services currently testing the drum will make a decision on whether to field it, and for what weapons, Ardese said.

He has received only positive feedback from those in charge of range testing, he said.

Articles

Now commandos have a new camera to record their door-kicking exploits

QUANTICO, Va. — It was the great mystery of the Seal Team 6 mission to kill terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden.


Did the DEVGRU door kickers have helmet cams to record their daring raid?

The Pentagon and everyone else said “No.” But we all know that’s a bunch of bull.

Cameras had become ubiquitous on the helmets of infantrymen even before the 2011 raid, and even pilots and other military specialties are jumping on the bandwagon. Big time movies and television series have been built on the backs of helmet cam footage, with GoPro and Contour cameras the primary options for troops in the field.

The Air Force’s ‘Destroyer’ was based on a Navy classic
Developed exclusively for high-speed operations where low profile and bomber durability are a must, the Elite Ops Camera has a curved housing that fits to the contours of a trooper’s helmet. The camera can endure a drop of six feet, is waterproof to 30 feet and has been jump tested. (Photo from MOHOC)

But their use has applications beyond chronicling the heat and grit of combat, with units increasingly using helmet camera footage for battle damage assessment and intelligence gathering.

That’s where the new Elite Ops Camera from MOHOC comes in.

Developed exclusively for high-speed operations where low profile and bomber durability are a must, the Elite Ops Camera has a curved housing that fits to the contours of a trooper’s helmet. The camera can endure a drop of six feet, is waterproof to 30 feet and has been jump tested, company officials say.

“We set out to build a military-ruggedized camera for extreme durability,” said MOHOC sales rep Eric Dobbie during an interview at the 2016 Modern Day Marine exposition here.

“I Like to call it the Panasonic Toughbook of cameras.”

Sure, there are several point-of-view cameras out there, but many are delicate and aren’t optimized for military missions. MOHOC has designed the Elite Ops Camera from the ground up with the warfighter in mind, Dobbie said, with an oversized on-off button and both a tone and vibration to alert the operator that the camera is up and running.

The MOHOC Elite Ops Camera has large buttons for operation with gloved hands. It also vibrates when the camera begins recording so troops can tell when it's on even in loud environments. (Photo from MOHOC) The MOHOC Elite Ops Camera has large buttons for operation with gloved hands. It also vibrates when the camera begins recording so troops can tell when it’s on — even in loud environments. (Photo from MOHOC)

There’s even a rechargeable internal battery and a slot for two CR-123s, so running low on juice won’t be a problem.

The Elite Ops Camera features a short-range wifi capability that connects with a smartphone app to view videos and check framing, and the camera can take stills with a press of a button. There’s even an infrared version of the Elite Ops Camera that records in black and white and automatically switches from light to IR mode.

“This works great as a training tool, for sensitive sight exploitation, combat camera and explosive ordnance disposal missions,” Dobbie said. “One of our biggest markets is with anyone that jumps out of a plane because we’re a snag-free option.”

MIGHTY TACTICAL

How America would slaughter Kim’s nuclear subs

As North Korea continues with their will-they/won’t-they stance on de-nuclearization, it’s worth looking at what options the U.S. has for countering the doomsday weapon that North Korea might posses: a nuclear-armed, ballistic-missile submarine. These are, broadly speaking, comparable to America’s Trident submarines designed to deliver a nuclear strike anywhere in the world with zero warning.

So, how is the Navy ready to prevent a radioactive Alaska or metro Los Angeles?


The Air Force’s ‘Destroyer’ was based on a Navy classic

Literally everything in this picture is more capable and stealthy than any asset the North Korean Navy has.

(U.S. Navy photo by Fire Control Technician Senior Chief Vien Nguyen)

America’s best offensive tool against enemy submarines is our own nuclear-powered attack subs. Right now, the Virginia class is the top of the line, and we’ve covered before how these things are basically 400-feet of black death. They’re super stealthy and capable of finding most other vessels underwater. They also carry a huge arsenal with up to 12 tomahawk cruise missiles and 38 torpedoes, usually the Mk. 48. They can also carry anti-ship missiles, but that requires trading out torpedoes.

When fully configured for anti-ship, anti-shore missions, the subs can take 50 shots at enemy forces on a single cruise. If it catches some enemy subs in the docks, the tomahawks can quickly wipe them out. But catching them underwater is even better since the Virginia-class can flood its torpedo tube, take its shot, and then disappear back into the surrounding ocean noise for a re-attack or to hunt down more targets.

Best of all, the Virginia-class has a huge noise advantage over North Korea’s fleet of antique and homegrown subs, all of which are diesel electric. While diesel-electric boats can be quieter than nuclear ones, it still requires a huge amount of research and engineering knowledge to create stealthy subs. North Korea’s fleet mostly pre-dates these developments and their performance in the open ocean has been less than stellar. It’s doubtful that their ballistic missile subs are much stealthier than the rest of the fleet.

Oh, and if you don’t like the Virginia class, we still have dozens of Los Angeles-class and Seawolf-class attack submarines that are also leaps and bounds ahead of anything North Korea can put to sea.

The Air Force’s ‘Destroyer’ was based on a Navy classic

The USS Fitzgerald, an Arleigh Burke-class destroyer, fires an anti-submarine rocket that is otherwise known as the “North Korean party crasher.”

(U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class William McCann)

But surely we aren’t counting solely on a couple of subs being on-station when a potential war breaks out? Of course not —rest assured, scared doubter that I made up for this segue. America also has a number of Arleigh Burke-class destroyers that we deploy to the Korean peninsula, especially during anti-submarine exercises.

The Arleigh Burke-class vessels are equipped with the awesome Aegis radar that you’ve likely heard so much about. If not, it’s such an amazing air defense radar that it’s often used on land-based installations to counter nearly anything that flies including Russia’s nuclear-armed ballistic missiles.

If a North Korean sub actually got a nuclear missile into the air, the Arleigh Burke-class has a good chance of knocking it right back out of the sky. The chances are slim that the sub would even get a chance to fire that missile since the Arleigh Burkes’ towed sonar array would likely find the sub and the destroyer’s anti-submarine rockets could put a quick end to it.

The Air Force’s ‘Destroyer’ was based on a Navy classic

These things can hover over you, waiting as long as is required to murder you and your whole crew.

(U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class Benjamin A. Lewis)

Add in the destroyer’s anti-submarine helicopter (yup, it has those), and it’s hard to imagine that those poor North Korean crews have much of a chance.

But what if all of that is somehow not enough? After all, the subs and ships have to get fairly close to the North Korean subs to find them, and there’s a lot of ocean out there.

The Air Force’s ‘Destroyer’ was based on a Navy classic

NK Sub: I’ll just hide way over here, far from the destroyers and subs. P-8 Poseidon: LOL

(U.S. Navy)

Luckily, the U.S. has also invested in a little thing called the P-8 Poseidon anti-submarine maritime patrol aircraft. It’s a Boeing 737, but with all the flight attendants and overhead bins ripped out and replaced with all the electronics you could ever imagine, all focused on spying out enemy submarines and reporting their locations to any and every asset in the area that can hurt them. Badly.

The plane can also do search and rescue or whatever, but that’s not important for this discussion.

The Air Force’s ‘Destroyer’ was based on a Navy classic

America has all these assets to destroy North Korean subs. Meanwhile, this North Korean sub was captured when it got itself stuck against the South Korean coast.

(Idobi, CC BY-SA 3.0)

So, with all the assets in theater, there are planes and helicopters in the air scooping up data on everything under the water, surface ships towing sonar arrays, and submarines carefully patrolling beneath the waves, listening to everything that happens in every nook and cranny.

And once one of them finds a target, Americans in the air, on the sea, and under the surface can all start pinning it in and attacking it with a vengeance. So, good luck, North Korean submarine crews. For your sake, you better hope that your engineers somehow created more stealthy submarines than the U.S., Russia, China, or NATO, because you will be very dead otherwise.

MIGHTY CULTURE

After 45 years, Green Beret faces his past in Vietnam – part one

Richard Rice did two tours in the Vietnam War and went on to have the kind of 30 year career in Special Forces that spanned every major conflict and mission of his generation. And in 2017, he went back to Vietnam for the first time since “Vietnam.”

In this episode, Rich visits the Maison Centrale in Hanoi aka “The Hanoi Hilton.”

I could feel Rich going back in time – planning how his MACV-SOG team could rescue the POW’s trapped behind these walls some 45 years ago.

The approach was beautiful. Wide sidewalks around a lake with a floating ancient temple, past a white tulip garden down a tree-lined street full of Sunday revelers and coffee shops and the excitement of abandon. It felt like Paris.


The Air Force’s ‘Destroyer’ was based on a Navy classic

We turned a corner and then became now deep in our guts and the prison doors were wide open, the scrolled Maison Centrale almost luring us in. We’d been all over Vietnam to date, retracing so many of Rich’s steps of yesteryears and yet here, in this moment, his tension was my tension and we felt trapped. We were just standing there on a sidewalk in front of the Hanoi Hilton beneath the high-rises and the rooftop bars, surrounded by the din of motorbikes and indifference.

There’s nowhere to go, really, if you just want to stand there and feel what it feels like to remember something you wish you could have done, but never did. Five minutes, ten minutes, I can’t remember. But there we stayed. I had a few beers in my ruck and we cracked them open and began another journey back to 2018.

The Air Force’s ‘Destroyer’ was based on a Navy classic

Rich looked around and said, “You know, I’m gonna chalk this up to an impossible mission. I would have happily volunteered to try to get our guys out, but this is impossible.” And he shook his head once and took a deep breath and his consolation prize was seeing it with his own two eyes.

It’s the only time I’ve ever heard him say the word impossible.

The Air Force’s ‘Destroyer’ was based on a Navy classic

We raised a toast to those who had sacrificed so much inside those walls, and beyond.

The doors were still open but we didn’t want to go in, but we didn’t want to leave. We took a few pictures, Rich said he couldn’t believe he was standing in front of the Hanoi Hilton, drinking a beer. “Of all the things I ever thought I’d do in life, I never thought I’d be doing this. This is crazy.”

And then there was a family next to us and their young boy, whose shirt said “If I was a bird, I know who I’d shit on,” and he kept making peace signs and goofy faces, just like my son does back home. How do you not laugh?

The Air Force’s ‘Destroyer’ was based on a Navy classic

The mom said with a big smile, “Are you from America?”
Rich said, “Yes ma’am we are. Are you from here?”

“Yes, Hanoi,” she said, pointing to the ground we were standing on.

So many worlds collided in that moment, and all of them were better for it. It was never and will never be the time to forget, but it was time to move on, to close a circle. A couple pictures with our new friends, one final toast to the fallen, and we were on our way.

A few years back, Rich and I had an immediate connection because we both served in Special Forces. But we became friends as we experienced Vietnam together – the kind of friends you can count on one hand how many you’ll have in your whole life, if you’re lucky.

The Air Force’s ‘Destroyer’ was based on a Navy classic

He did two tours in the war and went on to have the kind of 30 year career in Special Forces that spanned every major conflict and mission of his generation. A lot of people would call him a hero, a warrior, an American badass, the list goes on.

But all he ever wanted to do was serve America honorably, and earn the respect of the men to his left and right. And he describes himself as lucky to be alive, and then he smiles and says nobody owes him a damn thing. So if you meet him, just call him Rich.

Also read: After 45 years, Green Beret faces his past in Vietnam

This article originally appeared on GORUCK. Follow @GORUCK on Twitter.

MIGHTY HISTORY

Germany and Italy also had midget subs in World War II

When you think of “midget submarines” in the context of World War II, Japan’s spring to mind. It makes sense seeing as they played a role in the attack on Pearl Harbor — in fact, one such submarine was found beached near Oahu, exhumed, and then taken on tour to help the U.S. sell war bonds. But Germany and Italy also deployed midget submarines during the Second World War.

None of these subs racked up the huge kill counts of their full-sized counterparts. One of the big reasons for that was that these submarines just didn’t have a lot of speed (one of Germany’s most successful mini-subs could reach a top surface speed of seven knots). They also lacked endurance. That said, midget submarines came with a number of advantages: They were hard to locate, harder to kill, and didn’t require much in the way of materials, personnel, or fuel.


The Air Force’s ‘Destroyer’ was based on a Navy classic

Captured German Seehund midget submarines lined up.

(British Ministry of Defense)

Germany’s most successful midget submarine was the Seehund, which had a blistering top speed of three knots while submerged. It could go about 300 miles and carried two torpedoes. This sub managed to sink a freighter off the coast of Great Yarmouth, but it rarely saw action — less than half of the 285 built saw active service.

Italy, on the other hand, can lay claim to some serious bragging rights for pulling off what was perhaps the most successful midget submarine attack of World War II. On December 18, 1941, three human torpedoes, essentially primitive versions of today’s swimmer delivery vehicles, infiltrated the British naval base in Alexandria, Egypt.

The Air Force’s ‘Destroyer’ was based on a Navy classic

A human torpedo, similar to that used in the December 18, 1941 raid on Alexandria that damaged four Allied ships.

(Photo by Myrabella)

Italian frogmen, under the command of Luigi Durand de la Penne, used the human torpedoes to place mines on the battleships HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Valiant, as well as a British destroyer and a Norwegian tanker. The two battleships were damaged badly — enough to keep them out of action for months. De la Penne later has honored by the Italian Navy who named a destroyer after him.

Learn more about the German and Italian midget subs in the video below!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rV-4SvytC24

www.youtube.com

MIGHTY TACTICAL

MIT technology could reduce the number of nukes in the world

Even in peaceful times, stockpiled warheads can pose a danger if they’re accidentally set off or fall into the wrong hands. Plus, there’s always a chance conflict could escalate, which is why many experts support dismantling nuclear warheads around the world.

But most arms-control treaties don’t require warheads to be inspected, since the process could reveal military secrets. And even if inspections were required, nuclear experts worry that nations could try to fool inspectors by offering imitation warheads.

To eliminate the risk that countries would lie about this, two MIT researchers have come up with a novel way to verify that a warhead is authentic — all without revealing how the weapon was built.


The scientists describe the new technology in a paper published in the journal Nature Communications. Their method uses neutron beams: streams of neutrons that can plunge deep into a warhead and reveal its internal structure and composition, down to the atomic level.

The technology, if implemented, could encourage countries like Russia and US to allow their warheads to be inspected and verified as real before they get dismantled.

Nations typically don’t inspect warheads 

The US and Russia recently dissolved the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, which kept both countries from possessing, producing, or testing thousands of land-based missiles. Shortly after, each nation conducted a missile test, stoking fears of a nuclear arms race similar to the Cold War.

The Air Force’s ‘Destroyer’ was based on a Navy classic

(Defense Ministry)

During the Cold War era, the US and Russia built up their arsenals of nuclear warheads. By 1967, the US had acquired the most warheads in its history — around 30,000. The Soviet Union reached its peak warhead supply in 1986, when it had around 45,000.

When the Cold War ended in 1991, the nations agreed to dismantle some of these weapons, but they didn’t allow each other to inspect the actual warheads. Instead, they showed proof that the devices that carried these warheads, such as missiles and aircrafts, had been torn apart — which meant that the warheads couldn’t be deployed.

The US, for instance, cut off the wings of B-52 bombers and splayed them out in a “boneyard” in the Arizona desert. Russian officials could then verify via satellite that the planes were out of commission.

The Air Force’s ‘Destroyer’ was based on a Navy classic

A B-52 bomber.

(U.S. Air Force photo by Senior Airman Sarah E. Shaw)

Today, the US and Russia each have around 4,000 warheads left in their military stockpiles, in addition to around 2,000 warheads each that are “retired,” or ready to be dismantled. The Federation of American Scientists estimates that Russia is dismantling up to 300 retired warheads per year, but confirming that number isn’t easy.

That’s where the technology from the MIT researchers comes in.

The tool captures a warhead’s unique shadow, not classified details

The MIT researchers’ tool can detect isotopes like plutonium, which are found in the core of a warhead, since those atoms release specific wavelengths of light. These measurements then pass through a filter that scrambles and encrypts them. This allows a warhead’s unique structure to get probed without any resulting 3D image of its exact geometry. (It’s kind of like looking at a shadow of the warhead rather than the object itself.)

The Air Force’s ‘Destroyer’ was based on a Navy classic

W80 nuclear warhead.

(Public domain)

The researchers estimate that the scan can be completed in less than a hour.

The test’s encryption process is more secure than encrypting information on a computer, which can be hacked.

If nations are confident that their military secrets are safe, the researchers said, they could be more inclined to allow their warheads to be inspected. Of course, the method would need to be more thoroughly vetted before it could be implemented, they added.

But eventually, they said, it could help to “reduce the large stockpiles of the nuclear weapons that constitute one of the biggest dangers to the world.”

This article originally appeared on Business Insider. Follow @BusinessInsider on Twitter.

MIGHTY TACTICAL

Army pilot’s invention could have saved Kobe Bryant

When Nick Sinopoli saw the first reports of the crash that claimed NBA star Kobe Bryant, his daughter and 7 others, his gut told him the cause. “I knew right away what probably happened,” he said.

IIMC, or Inadvertent Instrument Meteorological Conditions, is when a pilot flies into clouds or low visibility conditions unexpectedly. Aviators who suddenly find themselves without any ground references can become dangerously disoriented. Without their eyes to tell them which way is up or down they often lose control. In fact, the National Transportation Safety Board reports that 86% of all general aviation and helicopter pilots crash when “punching in” the clouds. While Congress, the FAA and other organizations try to find a solution, it’s obvious that  the problem isn’t better equipment or more training. Nobody could find a solution to prevent these senseless deaths. Sinopoli discovered this the hard way.

Nick Sinopoli grew up in Austin, TX., home to legendary guitarist Stevie Ray Vaughn. His father loved his music so much that he moved his family to Austin in 1982. Ray Vaughn’s tragic death in a helicopter crash shook the world. In fact, celebrities like Patsy Cline, Buddy Holly, Richie Valens, The Big Bopper and John F. Kennedy Jr. also perished in similar accidents like the one that ended Bryant’s life on January 26, 2020. Sinopoli is no stranger to this type of tragedy himself.

Nick’s friend Rusty Allen, who got him his first helicopter ride, was killed in 2012 when he became disoriented and flew into the ground. “He was the first person I knew who died in an aircraft accident,” he said. Soon after, Nick graduated from Purdue with an engineering degree and went to flight school. There he learned how to “fly instruments”, while his eyes were covered with a piece of cardboard called a hood. On one particular training flight, his hood got stuck in his helmet while Nick was flying towards the runway and his teacher had to yank it out. This moment made an impact on him. He marveled that this antiquated training tool had never been improved. 

Pilots use solid visors to cover their eyes, simulating them being in the clouds. The technology hasn’t changed since Jimmy Doolittle first flew with a “vision restriction device” in 1929. Nick put his skills as an engineer to work, designing a new controllable hood that would mimic flying into the clouds unexpectedly. It’s this transition from being able to see, to not having anything but your cockpit gauges to orient you, that puts inexperienced pilots into a panic. The FAA calls it the “startle effect”. 

Nick knew he had to find a way to solve this nearly 100 year old problem. He said, “I constantly thought about it. It was all consuming. I knew it was my hill to die on. I realized that if anyone was going to stop these accidents, that it would have to be me.” After countless trial and error, Sinopoli perfected his design and sold his car to pay for the patent, which was granted in 2016.

The visor is made of a special material that goes from opaque to clear when electricity is applied. A tap on the ICARUS app lets the instructor select any level of visibility and choose how fast the visor becomes clouded. Pilots can now be forced to train in “bad weather” every time they take off, honing their planning skills from day one. “Making good decisions is just as important as being able to fly in deteriorating conditions. If you can train pilots to make better decisions then people don’t die. It’s just that simple. Everyone who has perished in these kinds of accidents would be alive today if the pilot had just stepped back and made a better decision before they got themselves into trouble,” Sinopoli says.

Now when pilots are faced with low visibility, it will not be the first time they’ve experienced it. Every day can be a bad weather day with ICARUS. “We can simulate the worst weather conditions that you’ll ever find yourself in. Best of all, you’ll be able to feel the true sensations of actual flight. A Green Beret told me that the first time the bullets start flying, you’re not going to suddenly become a good warrior. You have to realistically train like you fight before you see combat. What makes IIMC so deadly is that pilots could never train for it in the aircraft, until now,” Nick said. This is called primacy, or “first learned is best learned.”

ICARUS works equally well in airplanes and helicopters. It’s been requested by universities, flight schools, helicopter EMS operators, law enforcement, government agencies and military testers, including foreign militaries. Training for dangerous dust landings will also be safer with Nick’s invention. Multiple devices can be controlled from the app. You can also train snowy landings, smoke in the cockpit for aerial firefighting, etc. Sinopoli explained, “You can train brown-out dust landings with your entire crew in a parking lot on a clear day. That saves time, money and it’s obviously safer.” The applications for his invention are ever expanding. 

Pilots have already trained with the invention, earning their “instrument rating” with the FAA. Military and civilian instructor pilot Pedro Vargas has flown with ICARUS in airplanes and helicopters and says, “The ICARUS Device is a game changer. I was blown away after I flew with it the first time! It literally changes everything that the aviation world thought they knew about flight training.” Once pilots see what the device does, they instantly recognize how the revolutionary invention has finally solved the most dangerous problem affecting both civilian and military flying.

While it’s easy to see the value in training costs, damaged equipment and maybe even eventual insurance savings, this veteran-run venture has only one goal in mind, to save lives. Nick says, “We’ve been using the same technology for 91 years. Kobe Bryant’s pilot had recently been through a special bad weather training course in a simulator before the crash. It obviously didn’t work. None of the people on his helicopter had to die. A century of new technologies and regulations are not the ultimate solution to saving lives. The solution is better pilots.”
Check out this amazing device at www.icarusdevices.com for more info.

MIGHTY TACTICAL

This howitzer gives the British Army long-range firepower

While the British Military has shrunk since the end of the Cold War, the country is still responsible for many great weapons systems. In fact, the towed artillery pieces the United States Military uses, the M119 105mm howitzer and the M777 155mm howitzer, are both British designs. However, the Brits also have an excellent self-propelled howitzer.

It’s called the AS-90, and it replaced two self-propelled guns in British service: The M109, an American design, and the Abbot, an indigenous design that packed a 105mm gun. The AS-90 uses a 155mm gun based on the FH70 towed howitzer. The AS-90 has an effective range of up to 18 miles, depending on the ammo used.


The Air Force’s ‘Destroyer’ was based on a Navy classic

British Army AS-90 howitzers let loose during training in Iraq.

(Joint Combat Camera Center Iraq Photo by Pfc. Rhonda Roth-Cameron)

The system entered service in 1993, too late for Operation Desert Storm. Cutbacks after the fall of the Soviet Union meant that it also did not see a lengthy production run. It has a top speed of 34 miles per hour, which allows it to keep up with the Challenger 2, Britain’s main battle tank, which has a top speed of 37 miles per hour.

This 50-ton vehicle saw action during Operation Iraqi Freedom and in NATO peacekeeping missions in the Balkans, where it provided fire support. An improved version, the AS-90 “Braveheart,” was expected to feature a 33% longer barrel, but was cancelled after issues with the propellant emerged.

The Air Force’s ‘Destroyer’ was based on a Navy classic

The Polish Army is also using a version of the AS-90 – well, the turret of the cancelled AS-90 Braveheart – on a K9 Thunder chassis.

(Photo by VoidWanderer)

The AS-90 has received special modifications to enable for better performance during desert operations. These upgrades include tracks designed to operate better on sand and better ways to keep the crew and the engine cool. Currently, a total of six British artillery regiments operate this vehicle.

Although the AS-90 Braveheart is getting up there in age, pieces of it will remain important for years. The turret has been mated with the chassis of a South Korean self-propelled howitzer, the K9 Thunder, to make the AHS Krab. The Polish Army is planning to operate 120 of these.

Learn more about this British cannon in the video below!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9p7LeWAIKKI

www.youtube.com

popular

The history and design behind the legendary A-10

We’ve all seen the memes. The A-10 Thunderbolt II, better known as the Warthog, has become the internet’s favorite warplane thanks in large part to its signature ‘BRRRT’ sound that it makes when it fires its massive 30mm gun. It’s highly doubtful that the engineers at Fairchild Republic that designed the A-10 could have anticipated the legendary status that the aircraft they designed would achieve, let alone that it would still be flying, 50 years in the future. After all, while the A-10 was designed to take a beating, it was also designed to be cheap and easy to maintain.


The Air Force’s ‘Destroyer’ was based on a Navy classic
One of the best A-10 memes

There’s no question the German Panzer tanks were the most thoroughly engineered and well-built tanks of WWII. However, this attention to detail would be their downfall. Because American and Soviet tanks like the M4 Sherman and T-34 were much simpler and cheaper to produce, the allied forces were able to flood the fields of Europe with armor and overwhelm the numerically inferior German tanks. In addition to this, the allies controlled the skies overhead which made German armor easy pickings for ground attack aircraft like the Republic P-47 Thunderbolt. The lessons learned through the evolution of warfare would be applied to the P-47s spiritual successor a few decades later in the Cold War.

Following the end of WWII and the creation of the Iron Curtain, the Western allies of NATO embarked on a massive military buildup in order to meet the potential threat of the Warsaw Pact forces. If the Cold War were to heat up, the biggest battleground where these two sides would meet would be the Fulda Gap. Located between the Hesse-Thuringian border and Frankfurt am Main, the Fulda Gap contains two corridors of lowlands that the Soviets would have had to push their armored forces through in order to reach and cross the strategically vital Rhine River. As a result, allied armor was built up heavily in this region. The anticipated battle also influenced weapons doctrine and development at the time.

In order to win a fight on the ground, you had to win the fight in the air. This concept was proven in WWII. While ground forces went toe-to-toe with the enemy, air forces flew behind enemy lines in order to strike logistical targets like supply convoys, factories, roads, and bridges. From this, the doctrine of AirLand Battle was born. It emphasized close coordination between land forces acting as an aggressively maneuvering defense and air forces attacking rear-echelon forces feeding the enemy’s front-line forces. Picture divisions of M60 ‘Patton’ Main Battle Tanks trying to hold off the onslaught of Soviet T-54 and T-54s coming through the Fulda Gap while B-52 Stratofortress bombers flew overhead to destroy the Soviet supply lines feeding their tanks. Without going too in depth, this is AirLand Battle in a nutshell.

The Air Force’s ‘Destroyer’ was based on a Navy classic
Admit it, you played with these; we all did

Another lesson learned from WWII was that tanks were more effective when they worked in concert with close air support. Combined attacks by Sherman tanks and aircraft like the aforementioned P-47 spelled certain doom for German tanks. In order to carry this concept into the Cold War, the United States developed aircraft to fill the CAS role. While the Army was given the AH-64 Apache to kill tanks from the air, the Air Force was given the A-10 Lightning II.

Built by the same company that built the P-47 Thunderbolt (Republic Aviation was acquired by Fairchild Aircraft in 1965 to create Fairchild Republic), the Lightning II was the Fairchild Republic submission to the Air Force’s 1966 A-X aircraft program to acquire a low-cost attack aircraft. In 1970, the Air Force issued a more detailed request for proposals to the program including the mandate that the aircraft be equipped with a 30mm rotary cannon. On January 18, 1973, after a series of tests and trials, the Air Force announced that Fairchild Republic’s submission was selected and would enter production as the A-10. The new aircraft would be equipped with the GAU-8 30mm cannon which would be built by General Electric who won their own government contract in June of the same year.

The Air Force’s ‘Destroyer’ was based on a Navy classic
The source of the ‘BRRRT’

The A-10 was designed to engage enemy armor in close proximity to friendly forces from very low altitude. In order to deliver precision fires and avoid hitting friendly forces, the A-10 was designed to be slow but tough. Its most important component, the pilot, is protected underneath by a titanium tub capable of withstanding armor-piercing and high-explosive rounds up to 23mm in caliber. The canopy, while not as strong, is made of ballistic glass and is capable of resisting small-arms as well as shrapnel from AA fire and missiles to a certain degree. The fuel tanks are separated from the fuselage to reduce the likelihood of damage. The fuel system is also self-sealing and lined with a reticulated polyurethane foam both inside and outside. In the event that all four main tanks are depleted, the A-10 is equipped with two self-sealing sump tanks that contain enough fuel for 230 miles of flight.

The Air Force’s ‘Destroyer’ was based on a Navy classic
The A-10 will do much more than bite your legs off

The tail of the A-10 bears a striking resemblance to WWII-era level bombers. This unusual design increases stability, like it did for those bombers, making the A-10 a very stable gun platform. This attribute is critical for a CAS aircraft. The tail also helps to mask the heat signature of the top-mounted engines. Though its twin GE TF34 turbofan engines produce just over 41 kN of thrust each (compared to the F-15 Eagle’s original Pratt Whitney F100 engines which produced over 100 kN of thrust each), the aircraft is capable of flight with just one engine. Similarly, the hydraulic flight systems are both double-redundant and are equipped with a manual backup system if both hydraulic systems fail. In all, the A-10 can fly with one engine, one half of the tail, one elevator, and half of a wing missing.

Here’s the part you’ve all been waiting for: the A-10’s massive gun. Yes, the GAU-8/A Avenger is bigger than a VW Beetle. Yes, it fires 3,900 rounds per minute (although it was originally designed to fire at either 2,100 or 4,200 rounds per minute as dictated by the pilot). Yes, it goes ‘BRRRT’ when it shoots. As mentioned previously, the A-10 was designed around its gun. Although the gun itself is mounted slightly to the port side of the aircraft, the gun actually fires centerline because the barrel firing location is on the starboard side at 9 o’clock. This is critical since the gun is powerful enough to affect the aircraft’s orientation if it mounted off-center. In fact, the Avenger produces 44.5 kN of rearward thrust when it fires. In theory, the A-10 could stall itself by firing its gun. However, because its rate of fire is so high, pilots usually fire in 1-2 second bursts. Its ammunition is also very special. Made of depleted uranium which is nearly twice as dense as lead and nearly three times as dense as iron, the A-10s 30x173mm rounds are designed to punch through enemy armor like a hot knife through butter. Depleted uranium also sharpens as it penetrates armor whereas tungsten, which is slightly denser, tends to dull on impact. As an added benefit, depleted uranium is cheap and readily available as a byproduct of uranium enrichment. The A-10 can carry up to 1,350 30mm rounds, the casings of which are cycled back into the ammunition drum to prevent them from striking the aircraft or getting sucked into the engines.

The Air Force’s ‘Destroyer’ was based on a Navy classic
This is basically how DoD acquisitions works

When it comes to design, it doesn’t get much simpler than the A-10. Designed to operate from forward bases with little to no logistical or maintenance support, many of the A-10s components are interchangeable between its port and starboard side, including the engines, main landing gear, and vertical stabilizers. The wing design, sturdy landing gear, and low-pressure tires allow for short takeoffs and landings from even the most rudimentary forward landing strips. Similarly, the high engine placement helps to keep foreign object debris from entering them while operating from semi-prepared runways. The skin of the aircraft is not load-bearing and can be replaced easily in the field. Additionally, whereas most military aircraft require external power sources from ground crews in order to start their engines, the A-10 is equipped with an auxiliary power unit. This allows it to start itself and, again, operate from forward airfields with little to no support. In all, the A-10 is extremely cheap to fly, costing just ,944 per hour of operation. For comparison, the F-16 costs ,278 while the F-35 costs a whopping ,455.

The A-10 is a Cold War aircraft designed to cut through lines of Soviet tanks. Instead, it found renewed purpose in the War on Terror. Its effectiveness on the battlefield made it a favorite of both its pilots and the ground troops that it supported. When Congress threatened to put it on the chopping block, A-10 fans quickly took to the internet to voice their support for the ‘Hog’. Today, just about everyone knows about the A-10. At the very least, they know the sound it makes—’BRRRT’.

MIGHTY TACTICAL

Air Force wing completes first Combat Archer at Eglin AFB

F-22 Raptors from the 27th Fighter Squadron and F-35 Lightning IIs from the 58th Fighter Squadron successfully flew more than 140 sorties and fired 13 missiles to culminate the first post-Hurricane Michael Combat Archer air-to-air exercise at Eglin Air Force Base Dec. 14, 2018.

“This is the final step of our combat readiness — we assess our operations and maintenance personnel as well as the aircraft itself,” said Lt. Col. Marcus McGinn, 27th Fighter Squadron commander. “We need to make sure we have the ability to load missiles, the aircraft are configured correctly, the aircraft perform as they should when you press the pickle button, the missile performs as advertised and the pilots know what to expect. All of these aspects must be tested and proven prior to actually needing the process to work in combat.”


The 27th FS brought 200 personnel from Joint Base Langley-Eustis, Virginia, to participate in the exercise, which was flown out of Eglin AFB due to the rebuilding efforts at Tyndall AFB.

The Air Force’s ‘Destroyer’ was based on a Navy classic

Senior Airman Angel Lemon, 33rd Aircraft Maintenance Squadron crew chief, marshals an F-35A Lightning II assigned to the 58th Fighter Squadron, during exercise Combat Archer Dec. 4, 2018, at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla.

(U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Peter Thompson)

“The amount of coordination that goes into a single missile shoot cannot be quantified. The ability for the 83rd Fighter Weapon Squadron to accomplish this coordination across two different locations, with the infrastructure limitations that Tyndall (AFB) currently has, was unbelievable,” said McGinn.

This was the second Combat Archer the 27th Fighter Squadron has participated in this year. Of the 30 F-22 pilots, six were first-time shooters.

“While this was the first time I fired a live missile, I wasn’t nervous,” said 1st Lt. Jake Wong, 27th Fighter Squadron F-22 pilot. “There is the seriousness that I have a live missile on my jet today, which is not something we do every day. The training is really good and the flight profile is controlled so we know what to expect to ensure we fire the missile safely.”

The Air Force’s ‘Destroyer’ was based on a Navy classic

An F-35A Lightning II assigned to the 58th Fighter Squadron awaits permission to taxi as an F-22 Raptor assigned to the 27th Fighter Squadron takes off in the background, Dec. 4, 2018, at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla.

(U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Peter Thompson)

While the aircraft took off from Eglin AFB, the sub-scale drones assigned to the 82 ATRS, took off from Tyndall AFB.

“No other Air Force in the world comes close to the same scale of weapons testing as the U.S. Air Force,” said Lt. Col Ryan Serrill, 82nd ATRS commander. “We recognize the importance of this data to continually improve our warfighters’ ability which is why it was important to resume the Combat Archer mission so soon after the hurricane.”

The 83rd FWS conducted telemetry data collection and missile analysis, 81st Range Control Squadron conducted command and control and the 53rd Test Support Squadron provided electronic attack pods out of Tyndall AFB.

This article originally appeared on the United States Air Force. Follow @usairforce on Twitter.

MIGHTY CULTURE

The spooky way the UK teaches its Gurkhas English

When the English military needs to train its newest Gurkha recruits on English language and culture, they take them to the Gothic, fog-covered abbey that inspired Bram Stoker’s Dracula for some cruel reason. Then, they urge them to buy fish and chips from local vendors for some even crueler reason.


The Air Force’s ‘Destroyer’ was based on a Navy classic

A British Gurkha soldier watches down his rifle barrel for threats during an exercise with U.S. troops.

(U.S. Army William B. King)

Gurkha soldiers, for those who haven’t heard, are elite troops recruited out of the Gurkha region of Nepal. Troops from the kingdom stomped the British and the British East India Company in the 1760s and again during the Anglo-Nepalese War, which ran from 1814 to 1816. The Gurkhas defeated so many British troops that the East India Company hired them for future conflicts — if you can’t beam ’em, hire ’em.

This mercenary force proved itself over the years and, eventually, the Gurkhas were brought into the regular British Army in special regiments. Now, they’re elite units famous for their controlled savagery in combat.

When Gurkhas See The Sea For The First Time | Forces TV

youtu.be

Today, the Gurkhas are still recruited out of the mountains of Nepal. While they’re assessed on their English skills during the selection process, many young recruits from Nepal generally know little of the language and culture of the nation they swear to defend.

So, the British government gives them classes and takes them on field trips to historic sites. Oddly enough, one of the historical sites they take them to is the abbey in Whitby, North Yorkshire — the site that inspired Dracula.

“Thank you for defending England. Too bad it’s haunted, eh?”

The Air Force’s ‘Destroyer’ was based on a Navy classic

The Whitby Abbey ruins which helped inspire the story that would become ‘Dracula.’

(Ackers72, CC BY-SA 3.0)

Bram Stoker visited a friend in Whitby in July, 1890 — and it was a Gothic writer’s dream. It had the old abbey ruins, a church infested with bats, and large deposits of the black stone jet, often used in mourning jewelry.

Stoker was working on a novel about “Count Wampyr” when he arrived, but it was in a library in Whitby that he learned about Vlad Tepes, the impalement-happy prince whose nickname was Dracula, meaning “son of the dragon.” Stoker also learned about a Russian ship that had crashed nearby while carrying a load of sand. He tweaked the name of the ship to create the ship Dracula used to move his home soil and coffin to England.

The Air Force’s ‘Destroyer’ was based on a Navy classic

In ‘Dracula,’ the titular monster lands on the coast of Whitby — at a place like this — before climbing the abbey’s steps and beginning a reign of terror.

(Andrew Bone, CC BY 2.0)

In the novel, Dracula’s ship runs aground at Whitby and the “Black Dog” runs up the abbey’s 199 steps to begin terrorizing the English residents.

Now, Gurkhas tour the area to learn about Stoker and absorb some English history.

After their tour, the Gurkhas are encouraged to try out the local delicacy, fish and chips (for the fiercely American among us, “chips” means “french fries”). This may not seem like additional horror, but since Nepal is known for spicy curry and the English are known for using vinegar as a condiment, this is honestly the cruelest part of the lesson.

They also get to jump in the sea — or whatever.

MIGHTY TACTICAL

Austin is now officially home to the new Army Futures Command

After months of tedious searching, top U.S. Army leaders on July 13, 2018, announced that Austin, Texas, will be the location of its new Futures Command, which will lead the service’s ambitious modernization effort.

Army Secretary Mark Esper, surrounded by other key leaders, said that Army Futures Command will “establish unity of command and unity of effort by consolidating the Army’s entire modernization process under one roof. It will turn ideas into action through experimenting, prototyping, testing.”


Esper told defense reporters at the Pentagon on July 13, 2018, that the Army chose Austin for a variety of reasons.

“Not only did it possess the talent, entrepreneurial spirit and access to key partners we are seeking, but also because it offers the quality of life our people desire and the cost of living they can afford,” he said.

The announcement comes after the Army scoured the country searching for major cities with the right combination of an innovative industrial presence and academia willing to work with the service in creating its force of the future.

The Air Force’s ‘Destroyer’ was based on a Navy classic

M1A2 Abrams Main Battle Tank

The effort began three months ago with a list of 30 cities, which was quickly narrowed down to 15. Austin was selected from a short list of five, beating out Boston, Minneapolis, Philadelphia and Raleigh, North Carolina.

The Army announced its plan to build a future force in October 2018. It named six modernization priorities: long-range precision fires, next-generation combat vehicle, future vertical lift, a mobile network, air and missile defense, and soldier lethality. For each priority, special cross-functional teams of experts have been assembled to pursue change for the service.

If all goes as planned, the Army’s new priorities will ultimately lead to the replacement of all of its “Big Five” combat platforms from the Cold War with modern platforms and equipment. These systems include the M1 Abrams tank, Bradley fighting vehicle, Black Hawk helicopter, Apache attack helicopter, and Patriot air defense system.

This article originally appeared on Military.com. Follow @military.com on Twitter.

Do Not Sell My Personal Information