The List 6031 TGB
Good Sunday Morning March 13
I did not set my clocks ahead last night or set an alarm and during the day will have to set the three giant clocks around the house to get us all on the same time at some point.; I do dislike this time change nonsense and will spend the next 6 months getting used to this once again.
Regards,
Skip
This day in Naval and Marine Corps History
March 13
1944—Torpedo bomber aircraft from Composite Squadron Ninety-Five (VC 95) based aboard escort carrier Bogue (CVE 9), along with USS Hobson (DD 464) and USS Haverfield (DE 393), Canadian frigate HMCS Prince Rupert and RAF Flying Fortress (No. 220 Squadron) sink German submarine U 575 in the North Atlantic.
1952—During the Korean War, counter-battery engagements by USS Manchester (CL 83), USS James E. Kyes (DD 787), USS McGinty (DE 365) and USS Douglas H. Fox (DD 779) are supported by aircraft from Task Force 77 silence enemy guns at Kalmagak during the Siege of Wonsan.
1963—USS Albany (CG 10) and aircraft from Navy Airborne Early Warning Squadron Four aid five ill crewmembers of Norwegian freighter Jotunfjell.
1993—USS Montpelier (SSN 765) is commissioned at Naval Station Norfolk, her homeport. The boat is the 15th in the Los Angeles-Improved class of attack submarines.
Today in History March 13
483 St. Felix begins his reign as Catholic Pope.
607 The 12th recorded passage of Halley's Comet occurs.
1519 Hernando Cortez lands in what will become Mexico.
1660 A statute is passed limiting the sale of slaves in the colony of Virginia.
1777 Congress orders its European envoys to appeal to high-ranking foreign officers to send troops to reinforce the American army.
1781 Astronomer William Herschel discovers the planet Uranus, which he names 'Georgium Sidus,' in honor of King George III.
1793 Eli Whitney patents the cotton gin.
1861 Jefferson Davis signs a bill authorizing slaves to be used as soldiers for the Confederacy.
1868 The U.S. Senate begins the impeachment trial of President Andrew Johnson.
1881 Czar Alexander II is assassinated when a bomb is thrown at him near his palace.
1915 The Germans repel a British Expeditionary Force attack at the Battle of Neuve Chapelle in France.
1918 Women are scheduled to march in the St. Patrick's Day Parade in New York due to a shortage of men.
1935 A three-thousand-year-old archive is found in Jerusalem confirming biblical history.
1940 Finland capitulates conditionally to Soviet terms, but maintains its independence.
1941 Hitler issues an edict calling for an invasion of the Soviet Union.
1942 Julia Flikke of the Nurse Corps becomes the first woman colonel in the U.S. Army.
1943 Japanese forces end their attack on the American troops on Hill 700 in Bougainville.
1951 Israel demands $1.5 billion in German reparations for the cost of caring for war refugees.
1957 The FBI arrests Jimmy Hoffa on bribery charges.
1963 China invites Soviet Premiere Nikita Khrushchev to visit Beijing.
1970 Cambodia orders Hanoi and Viet Cong troops to get out.
1974 The U.S. Senate votes 54-33 to restore the death penalty.
1974 Arab nations decide to end the oil embargo on the United States.
1981 The United States plans to send 15 Green Berets to El Salvador as military advisors.
1985 Upon the death of Konstantin Chernenko, Mikhail Gorbachev becomes the new leader of the Soviet Union.
1991 Exxon pays $1 billion in fines and costs for the clean-up of the Alaskan oil spill.
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
Change the Clock
I know just how this guy feels.
Don't open this within hearing range.
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
ROLLING THUNDER REMEMBERED Thanks to the Bear … Bear🇺🇸⚓️🐻
OPERATION ROLLING THUNDER (1965-1968)…
From the archives of rollingthunderremembered.com post
… For The List for Sunday, 13 March 2022… Bear🇺🇸⚓️🐻
OPERATION ROLLING THUNDER (1965-1968)…
From the archives of rollingthunderremembered.com post for 13 March 1967… New York Times writer Peter Baestrup takes us to Takhli…
This following work accounts for every fixed wing loss of the Vietnam War and you can use it to read more about the losses in The Bear's Daily account. Even better it allows you to add your updated information to the work to update for history…skip
Vietnam Air Losses
Access Chris Hobson and Dave Lovelady's work at: https://www.VietnamAirLosses.com.
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
To All,
We are actually Sprung ahead lastnight and lost an hour of sleep. I always have hated this one. I do remember cruising to and from the Western Pacific where we would change the time almost every day for the two weeks or so it took to get there and back and it was not to long where we were having breakfast 3 times a day.
Or so it seemed.
Fall back, spring ahead
By Peter Skurkiss
Get ready to go through the routine of turning the clocks forward an hour this weekend. Daylight savings time is coming to us... yet again.
Daylight savings time has been with us in the United States since the days of World War I. It has seen several changes since then but still exists essentially in its original form. Clocks are changed during the summer months to move an hour of daylight from the morning to the evening.
The stated intent of daylight savings time is to make better use of daylight. The supposed tangible benefits are that it reduces crime, lowers energy usage, and reduces traffic accidents. One has to wonder, however, if the marginal improvement in these areas, if there are actually any, are worth the inconvenience of it all.
A 2017 poll found 74 percent of Americans want to end daylight savings time. I'm one of them.
Given the lack of public support for daylight savings time, it's a marvel that it is still with us. And this is despite the fact that there are no powerful self-interest groups fighting to preserve it. This attests to the power of the status quo, of the tendency to keep what already exists. Little wonder then why it is next to impossible, say, to eliminate a government program, not to mention an outmoded government department, once it has established itself.
If elected representatives at the state and federal levels can't give people what they want on the relatively simple, nonpartisan matter of the clocks, what chance is there that they can implement constructive reforms on anything at all? Little, I'd say.
BTW I once read an article that showed an increase in automobile accidents after the Spring ahead nonsense….skip
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
Thanks to Carl
Antique Autos - Cars with Eyeshades, Eyebrows, & Hoodies, 1951 - 1963
Eyeshades, Eyebrows, & Hoodies, 1951 - 1963
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
Some hjumor from List 3577
A Little Fun...................
I'm not saying let's go kill all the stupid people. I'm just saying let's remove all the warning labels and let the problem work itself out.
I changed my car horn to gun shot sounds. People move out of the way much faster now.
You can tell a lot about a woman's mood just by her hands. If they are holding a gun, she's probably angry.
Gone are the days when girls used to cook like their mothers Now they drink like their fathers.
You know that tingly little feeling you get when you really like someone? That's common sense leaving your body.
I don't like making plans for the day because then the word "premeditated" get's thrown around in the courtroom.
I didn't make it to the gym today. That makes five years in a row
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim
I feel so much better saying I went to the jim this morning
Dear paranoid people who check behind shower curtains for murderers, if you find one, what's your plan?
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
From the List 3317 archives 3/13/2013
Thanks t o Carl
The CVN in the Marketplace of Ideas
CNAS has a new series of think-bits out that should be of interest to the Front Porch; About the Series: As U.S. spending on defense declines, hard choices will need to be made to ensure the health of U.S. Armed Forces and their ability to promote and defend America's interests. The Disruptive Defense Papers are designed to be hard-hitting arguments dealing with controversial issues in U.S. defense policy. The opinions in these papers are those of the authors, as CNAS does not take institutional positions.
The first inning of the creative friction game is out, and its author is hail fellow well met, friend of the blog, and regular on Midrats - our own Captain Henry J. Hendrix, USN (Ph.D.) titled, "At What Cost a Carrier."
You need read it all. It has something for everyone; a bit of history, a bit of philosophy, a bit of number crunching, but more importantly it challenges you to think about your assumptions and to take a clear look at the hardness of facts and the tyranny of technology, speed, money, and distance in this line of work.
You don't have to agree with all of it - I don't - but that isn't the point. No one has the exactly right answer. Only through good, vigorous, open, and informed debate can each side push the center-point closer to the truth.
I would be remiss if I didn't give you at least a peak at what managed to get me to scribble in the margins, and here are a few points and observations I'd like to make, if Jerry would be so kind as to indulge me.
The national security establishment, the White House, the Department of Defense and Congress persist despite clear evidence that the carrier equipped with manned strike aircraft is an increasingly expensive way to deliver air power and that carriers themselves may not be able to move close enough to targets to operate effectively or survive in an era of satellite imagery and long-range precision strike missiles.
There are good reasons and bad reasons for that. You have to not only look at the vulnerabilities of the carrier - but also its capabilities. What can it do better than other assets, including the opportunity costs? If satellite imagery and long-range precision strike missiles are a game-ender, then why are so many nations working to get their own carriers?
To kill other carriers? No. Not that, that is the job for a submarine. No, other nations see what we do with our carriers and want that, which is why so many nations are building them. There is your value proposition. Define what need it is meeting - and see if it is the best answer.
This report does just that;
This report explores the evolution of the aircraft carrier, its utility, power, costs and vulnerabilities, and then suggests a different course for U.S. naval forces, one that emphasizes far greater use of unmanned aircraft – generally described as UCAVs, for "unmanned combat aerial vehicles" – as well as submarines in combination with long range precision strike missiles.
There you go.
Going back to the first pull quote, as far as threats to capital ships come, this is a long story that requires one to not have a static view of threat and counter battery. At one time or another in the last century or so, the torpedo boat was seen as the killer of capital ships for a farthing. The depth charge was to be the simple end to the submarine threat, then the homing torpedo. The Dreadnought was to sweep the seas of all, and after WWII, well ... the nuclear weapon was going to make all navies and conventional armies obsolete in the face of this epoch ending technological leap. Anti-ship cruise missile (ASCM) was to be what the torpedo was supposed to be.
It didn't turn out quite that way ... it never does. Torpedoes and the boats above and below the surface that carry them, depth charges, gunned warships, ASCM, and even nuclear weapons have made their mark and have found their place ... but they only modified the rules of the game, not radically change them. Caution, informed caution. Never feel that what you have is the best, and don't put all your hope in the latest. Build a little, test a little, learn a lot - think even more.
The director of the Air Warfare Requirements Division and the program executive officer for aircraft carriers (two rear admirals) published an article arguing that cutting the carrier force would lead to a decrease in the U.S. maritime presence and that large deck carriers are necessary to meet the nation's strategic objectives in the 21st century. They also argued that only carriers possess the global reach, sustained airpower and proof of purpose to influence the global arena and maintain the U.S.
position in the world.
The core of this argument parallels in many respects the CNO's "Payloads Over Platforms" discussion. Something for those two rear admirals to explain though is why TACAIR has painted themselves in to a flight deck of light fighters which - as the report outlines - significantly weakens the utility of the carrier as a strike platform in all but the most permissive environments. We once knew that - but in the budget battles and parochialism spawned by the end of the Cold Wart, we threw that institutional knowledge away.
...analysts have begun to lay the theoretical framework of a broader argument that persistent presence, even with low-end platforms, encourages conflict avoidance So we have the important question of scale of impact. Do 2 CVN have as much of an impact for conflict avoidance than 3 large-deck amphibs? 4? Also, if you have to transition from conflict avoidance to peace enforcement or open conflict - which platform in place gives you the most capability?
Given that the aircraft carrier is the benchmark for current naval presence missions, for the purposes of discussion, assume it has a presence value of
1.00 on a sliding scale where a riverine detachment, on the low end, has a value of 0.01. This means that the current acquisition cost of 1.00 presence is $13.5 billion, which raises the question of whether an alternative combination can achieve this level of presence at a lower cost.
What is the presence value of a destroyer? Can one assign it a 0.2 presence value? Would spending $10 billion on five destroyers to create a 1.00 naval presence value at an operating cost of $1.8 million per day be a better investment? What about a littoral combat ship? Does its presence, bearing the Stars and Stripes, not assert American interests near a 0.10 presence score at a cost of $500 million apiece? Would not a $5 billion investment in 10 littoral combat ships, at a combined operating cost of $1.4 million per day – ships that could be present in many places simultaneously – not meet U.S. presence requirements more economically?
Those are the questions that need to be asked, answered, and argued.
Though I like crunching numbers - spreadsheets and graphs are my favorite - you can argue numbers, but you need a starting point. This works for me.
The Nimitz-class carriers can generate approximately 120 sorties a day. The Ford-class carriers, with the new electromagnetic aircraft launch system (EMALS), are projected to launch around 160 sorties per day, a 33 percent increase in launch capacity. This seems very impressive until one realizes that the USS George H.W. Bush, the last Nimitz carrier, cost $7 billion and the USS Gerald R. Ford is coming in at $13.5 billion. In the end, the nation is paying nearly 94 percent more for a carrier that can only do 33 percent more work. Even factoring in projected savings from reduced manning and lower maintenance costs, this investment is still not a good use of U.S. taxpayer money, especially given what U.S. sortie requirements are and what they are projected to be.
Here is one of the "I think you may have missed a shift" moments I have with the report.
... the observation by Colin Powell – former secretary of state, national security adviser and chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff – that modern warfare plays out under "Pottery Barn rules" (if you break it, you own it and you will pay to replace it). Reconstruction in Iraq and Afghanistan has cost the American taxpayer more than $109 billion since 2002. Future wars should be characterized by smaller target lists that emphasize discreetly interrupting capacities, not destroying them.
I think things have changed. I get the sense that the experience of a decade of war started a shift in the American public and politicians. We have moved from the early '90s "CNN Effect" and Powell's rule what for a lack of a better description would be a neo-realist "French Rule" as roughly seen in recent Libyan and Mali operations. It is a mixture of colonial policing and punitive expeditions. A power sees a problem and says to the source of problem and the world, "You are a problem. You tire me, and in order to move you to the back page I am going to try to kill you and as many of your friends as possible. I am going to break your stuff, and then I am going to hand things over to my friends and your enemies to finish the rest. Besides that, not my problem. Stay in your hole and I'll leave you alone. Oh, and don't bother sending the bill."
The 19th century Russians understood this quite well, and as did we in our own way until the Progressive Era.
Though I find them a challenge and a tough tactical nut to crack - I'm not as set back on my heels by by the Chinese DF-21D anti-ship ballistic missile and the hypersonic cruise missile - though I'm close.
... no weapon has captured the imagination of American naval strategists like the DF-21D missile. Using a maneuverable re-entry vehicle (MaRV) placed on a CSS-5 missile, China's Second Artillery Division states that its doctrine will be to saturate a target with multiple warheads and multiple axis attacks, overwhelming the target's ability to defend itself.
The MaRV warhead itself would use a high explosive, or a radio frequency or cluster warhead that at a minimum could achieve a mission kill against the target ship. While the United States does not know the cost of this weapons system, some analysts have estimated its procurement costs at $5 million to
$11 million. Assuming the conservative, high-end estimate of $11 million per missile gives an exchange ratio of $11 million to $13.5 billion, which means that China could build 1,227 DF-21Ds for every carrier the United States builds going forward. U.S. defenses would have to destroy every missile fired, a tough problem given the magazines of U.S. cruisers and destroyers, while China would need only one of its weapons to survive to effect a mission kill. Although U.S. Navy and Air Force leaders have coordinated their escorts to develop the means to operate in an anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) environment by disrupting opposing operations, the risk of a carrier suffering a mission kill that takes it off the battle line without actually sinking it remains high.
For the Chinese and others, saying it an doing it are two separate things.
New threats are only a problem if one doesn't recognize it in time to counter the threat.
There is also a grand military tradition of bluffing your opponent in to thinking you are more dangerous than you are. King snakes and butterflies are masters of it. Just something to get your cool-headed intel guys on.
Back to UCAV. Unmanned systems need to be looked at as evolutionary, which is exactly what UCAV is. So much of the discussion about the UCAV falls in to a trap that so many have fallen in before – getting way ahead of the capability and over emphasizing their utility. We saw in with the previously mentioned nuclear weapons hype – something that every war from Korea to Afghanistan shows to an exaggeration.
We saw it with guided missiles, which from the F-4s over Vietnam to the British Fleet in the Falkland Islands showed their limited utility across the broad spectrum of tactical requirements. I think we are in danger of repeating that love of the new and shiny with UCAV. As I read it, the report supports a forward looking, but cautions approach. That is the way to go.
All these factors indicate that a turn toward UCAVs is long overdue. The advent of A2/AD technologies is pushing U.S. carrier strike groups farther from their targets, and the combat radius of the F-35, or Joint Strike Fighter (JSF), is simply not going to solve that problem. One solution would be to cancel the always-troubled JSF now while simultaneously extending production of the lower-cost Hornets. That would allow the Navy to invest the nearly $70 million cost differential between the JSF and the
F/A-18 in accelerating the development and production of a UCAV that could operate both from large carriers and from smaller, less expensive, light amphibious carriers. New Hornets operating from the legacy large carriers would allow the United States to meet its obligations in the near term while investment in UCAVs would begin the Navy's pivot toward the new strategic environment. The new UCAVs would be flown only when operationally needed. UCAV pilots would maintain their currency in simulators, reducing personnel and operational costs and extending their airframes' lives by decades.
As UCAV and other unmanned systems are simply an evolution of an existing tool, they are not a replacement for most of the toolbox. As it stands right now, it is best looked at as a re-usable TLAM. It won't really be what many want it to be for awhile, as until it has the capability to operate autonomously in an EMCON profile – it won't be close to meeting the promise. The connectivity and electromagnetic spectrum leashes are just not acceptable in any but the most permissive environment. Any electron leaking out of a UCAV is like a sniper with a disco ball over his head. An UCAV unable through AI to have pre-planned evasive maneuvers is little more than a slow, modern, reusable V-1.
With caution, within a decade we should through UCAV have a good "door kicker" especially to go in areas where you don't want a POW, but policy makers must have a clear-headed understand of its limitations and the very real handicap of not having a human in the cockpit. That too is both a capability, and a vulnerability.
Another limitation is cost. UCAV are not cheap and definitely should not be seen as expendable. Until we can get the performance and cost curves to cross in our favor, UCAV will be a bit too Tiffany, as the F-117 was in her age, to be any more than a support player. An important one, but just a support player and enabler.
UCAV performance on average is not earth shaking. Yes, it can take more G forces … but its situational awareness to know where to go to evade is just not there. There is a big difference between defensive air combat maneuvering and flailing around.
The last paragraphs of the report opens with a reminder of what made our Navy such an innovator – and something we should make sure we don't lose.
An innovative culture has characterized the U.S. Navy throughout its history. The carrier had its day, but continuing to adhere to 100 years of aviation tradition, even in the face of a direct challenge, signals a failure of imagination and foreshadows decline. Money is tight, and as the nautical saying goes, the enemy has found our range. It is time to change course.
I think it is too early to say the carrier's day is over. Now, to say there needs to be more tools with different capabilities to meet changing requirements – that is spot on. Carriers are part of that, but the argument must be joined if there needs to be an adjustment to Fleet composition. To do it right, we must challenge inertia and established norms; break the intellectual adhesions and make sure we have the right answer to the right question.
Captain Hendrix's report is a nice shot across the forward CATS – and a solid starting point. Excellent job of being in the arena, Jerry.
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
Japan's Little-Known Second Surprise Attack on Hawaii.
Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor was a huge triumph for the Japanese Navy that nearly wiped out the U.S. Pacific Fleet's battleships and most of Oahu's air defenses. Just three months later, Japan planned another bombing raid on Hawaii using its newest long-range aircraft, the "flying boat" Kawanishi H8K. Soon after the attacks, Japanese war planners realized they had missed critical targets such as the shipyards, maintenance ships, and fuel reserve facilities. When America used the virtually untouched facilities to mobilize, the Japanese hoped to stymie the salvage effort with Operation K—a bombing raid using the H8K. "The H8Ks, with a 124-foot wingspan and a top speed of nearly 300 mph, took off from Wotje Atoll in the Marshall Islands on March 3 and set down in the calm waters of French Frigate Shoals about 560 miles northwest of Honolulu. There they were refueled by two waiting submarines. They then flew in the dark toward Oahu, each plane carrying four 550-pound bombs." To find out what happened, read the article in the Stars & Stripes.
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
This Day in U S Military History
13 March
1781 – Astronomer William Herschel discovered the planet Uranus, which he named 'Georgium Sidus,' in honor of George III. He initially though it was a comet. It is the 7th planet from the sun and revolves around the sun every 84.02 years. It is 14.6 time the size of Earth and has five satellites. The planet Uranus is a gas giant like Jupiter and Saturn and is made up of hydrogen, helium, and methane. The third largest planet, Uranus orbits the sun once every 84 earth years and is the only planet to spin perpendicular to its solar orbital plane. In January 1986, the unmanned U.S. spacecraft Voyager 2 visited the planet, discovering 10 additional moons to the five already known, and a system of faint rings around the gas giant.
1895 – Award of first submarine building contract to John P. Holland Torpedo Boat Co. In 1895, John Philip Holland received the U.S. Navy contract to build a submarine. The Plunger would have been the first submarine destined for service in the U.S. Navy. However, foreseeing her failure because of an overly optimistic set of requirements, he began building another submarine using his own money and plans. This vessel was later christened USS Holland. This was truly the first successful U.S. submarine in America's Navy. After some acceptance tests in the Potomac River (she wasn't certified for the high seas), she was delivered in 1900 and became a model against which all subsequent submarines were compared. She could attain a speed of 7 knots on the surface with her 45 HP gasoline engine and about 5.5 knots submerged on her batteries. Her hardy crew consisted of one officer and five enlisted men. 1901 – Benjamin Harrison (67), 23rd president of the United States (1889-1893), died in Indianapolis.
1944 – On Bougainville, US forces mount a counterattack, with armor and air support, and recapture most of the ground lost during the last few days.
1944 – On Hauwei Island, the small US forces overrun the Japanese garrison. Artillery units are landed to support planned operations on Manus Island.
1945 – The 1st and 3rd Battalions of the 9th Marine Regiment attacked through "Cushman's Pocket," Iwo Jima. This was the last strongpoint of enemy resistance on the island.
Medal of Honor Citations for Actions Taken This Day
KYLE, PATRICK J.
Rank and organization: Landsman, U.S. Navy. Born: 1855, Ireland. Accredited to: Massachusetts. Citation: For rescuing from drowning a shipmate from the U.S.S. Quinnebaug, at Port Mahon, Minorca, 13 March 1879.
*CRAIN, MORRIS E.
Rank and organization: Technical Sergeant, U.S. Army, Company E, 141st Infantry, 36th Infantry Division. Place and date: Haguenau, France, 13 March 1945. Entered service at: Paducah, Ky. Birth: Bandana, Ky. G.O. No.: 18, 13 February 1946. Citation: He led his platoon against powerful German forces during the struggle to enlarge the bridgehead across the Moder River. With great daring and aggressiveness he spearheaded the platoon in killing 10 enemy soldiers, capturing 12 more and securing its objective near an important road junction. Although heavy concentrations of artillery, mortar, and self-propelled gunfire raked the area, he moved about among his men during the day, exhorting them to great efforts and encouraging them to stand firm. He carried ammunition and maintained contact with the company command post, exposing himself to deadly enemy fire. At nightfall the enemy barrage became more intense and tanks entered the fray to cover foot troops while they bombarded our positions with grenades and rockets. As buildings were blasted by the Germans, the Americans fell back from house to house. T/Sgt. Crain deployed another platoon which had been sent to his support and then rushed through murderous tank and small-arms fire to the foremost house, which was being defended by 5 of his men. With the enemy attacking from an adjoining room and a tank firing pointblank at the house, he ordered the men to withdraw while he remained in the face of almost certain death to hold the position. Although shells were crashing through the walls and bullets were hitting all around him, he held his ground and with accurate fire from his submachinegun killed 3 Germans. He was killed when the building was destroyed by the enemy. T/Sgt. Crain's outstanding valor and intrepid leadership enabled his platoon to organize a new defense, repel the attack and preserve the hard-won bridgehead.
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
AMERICAN AEROSPACE EVENTS for March 13, 2021 FIRSTS, LASTS, AND SIGNIFICANT ACCOMPLISHMENTS. THANKS TO HAROLD "PHIL" MYERS CHIEF HISTORIAN AIR FORCE INTELLIGENCE, SURVEILLANCE, AND RECONNAISSANCE AGENCY
13 March
1911: Capt W. Irving Chambers (USN) joined the Bureau of Navigation to devote his efforts exclusively to naval aeronautics. (24)
1917: The birth of Army air intelligence took place when Chief Signal Officer Brig Gen George O. Squier approved an intelligence subdivision office in the Aeronautical Division. (24)
1958: The USAF Ballistic Missile Committee picked Lowry AFB to become the first Titan I base. (6)
1959: Aviation Cadet E. R. Cook soloed in a TT-1 Pinto and became the first student in naval aviation history to solo a jet without previous experience in propeller aircraft. (24) An Aerobee-Hi rocket launched from White Sands took the first ultraviolet photos of the sun from an altitude of 123 miles. (24)
1977: TAC received its first air refuelable Combat Talon C-130 Hercules. (16)
1993: STORM OF THE CENTURY. Through 14 March, 301 RS helicopters saved 93 people after a major blizzard swept over a third of the US from the Gulf of Mexico to New England. (16) (26)
1994: The first Taurus booster lifted two military satellites into space from Vandenberg AFB. (16) (26)
2007: The first MQ-9 Reaper, a newer, larger and stronger version of the MQ-1 Predator Unmanned Aerial Vehicle, arrived at Creech AFB, Nev. The 42nd Attack Squadron commander, Lt Col Jon Greene, flew the MQ-9 more than 250 miles in two hours to land there. (AFNEWS, "First MQ-9 Reaper Makes Its Home on Nevada Flightline," 14 Mar 2007.) At Little Rock AFB, Ark., General Duncan McNabb, the Air Mobility Command commander, delivered the first combat-ready C-130J Hercules to the 463d Airlift Group. (AFNEWS, "Air Mobility Command, 463d Airlift Group Welcomes First C-130J," 15 Mar 2007.)
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.