My brother was a radar navigator on LURE 75 and was killed on April 11th, 1983 on Square Top Mountain in Utah. I visited the site last week. What a chilling and surreal experience. Love you always brother. Fly high.
Hi Doug. What a small world. I lived next door to the widow of the aircraft commander of Lure 75 in Warner Robin's GA - her name was Pam. She was devastated by the loss of her husband Don, and had quite a struggle to regain her balance. We lost a lot of good people in training. The generals insisted that we would fight the way we trained, so our training was very realistic - and included significant risk. Limits were pushed, and risks were taken. Sometimes we learned valuable lessons and became more capable. Occasionally, while striving for excellence, good people died. The crew of Lure 75 were among the best.
There is “nothing” as impressive as an entire wing of BUFF’s scrambling and levitating into the air 10-15 sec apart. Back in the day these guys knew they had at best 20 min before warheads so every scramble they made it count. I am humbled by their dedication.
And even after they lifted off, there was no assurrance the Soviets wouldn't target points off the ends of the runway (as well as the field itself) in order to destroy them as they departed the vicinity.
@@Petidani0330 No, the Air Force and the US miltary does them as part of emergency exercises in case of nuclear attack. Look at all the recent NATO exercises.
The RAF did a 4 Vulcan QRA at one of the Finningley airshows late 60s. So close one would be lifting off as the next started its roll. The ground quaked for several minutes.
When I watched this, all I could think about was the wake turbulence. I attended Nav School in 1989-1990, and I arrived at Mather AFB in September 1989, one week after all the BUFFs stationed there departed the field for the last time. I was told it was quite a show. While at Mather, I got to fly the T-37, and as we were flying in to the base, we followed a C-5 while going in. We were three miles out, and a thousand feet of separation. Due to the wake turbulence, it was a hell of a bumpy ride all the way down to the runway. I've never done a MITO, but having had a taste of the wake turbulence while flying behind that C-5, I get a tiny taste and a little bit of a sense of what it must have been like for you guys at the back of the pack. Cheers from one Nav to another.
@randallulrich One "advantage" to the smokey and steamy exhausts of all the planes was that you could pretty much see the turbulent air - at least for the first few jets. It was generally better to have a slight crosswind rather than have the wind coming straight down the runway. That way, the vorticies would move off to one side, while you could sorta slide out to the other. When you watch the video and see a plane banking hard to one side shortly after becoming airborne, it is generally for one of two reasons: 1) They are maneuvering to try and avoid the vorticies, or 2) They are passing through the vorticies and are being tossed around. For me, the bank angle swings were not as alarming as the pitch occilations. I did not like decending during climb out. The plane just felt like it was mushing downward for several seconds, and acceleration was slow. For exercise (peace time) scenarios, we might have a gross weight of perhaps 280,000 lbs. Max. That would give us a rotate speed of around 170 knots at 20 degree flaps, or slightly less if we needed 30 degrees of flaps. We'd spend the first two minutes with water injection, and perhaps get to 180 knots... but as soon as the water ran out, you'd lose about 5-6,000 lbs. of thrust. If you didn't lower the nose a bit, the airspeed would drop off fast, and of course the wake turbulence was still everywhere. It was challenging, which is why we had to practice often to stay proficient. I think pilots and Navs had to do a MITO as number 2 (or beyond) once every 45 days to stay current. In practice, we typically got one every 30 days as part of a two ship. These large scale exercises like you see in the video were annual things that were not entirely routine. But, crews could deploy to the Pacific, Alaska, or Mildenhall UK throughout the year, and those deployments often provided further opportunities for large cell departures. I participated in a large cell departure out of Kadena AB circa 1984 that had 24 KC-135's and 36 F-15's. The turbulence was insane, but we were able to move to one side and stay clear of the closest vorticies. Nobody on our crew was over 25 years old. So none of us were "experienced". We laughed about it because we could not rent a car in Hawaii, but we COULD fly a tanker all over the Pacific and make life or death decisions without "adult supervision." For all of us, that was the appeal of the Air Force ....great responsibility at a very young age. Best times of our lives!
I, too, was a KC-135 nav. I was "drafted" into the KC-135 after my last assignment in AC-130 gunships in 1973. The memories of being in tankers is one that forever be remembered with great fondness. There was nothing greater feeling than flying across the "Pond" without a GPS or navigating over the polar region; just using celestial means to get there. I never flew with the PINS {Palletized Inertial Navigation System). Remembered my very young Boomer mooning a BUFF, after refueling, during an ORI! The alerts, the ORIs, the TDYs, were all part of being in SAC. I spent 5 years at Loring AFB and for a South Texas local, it was a shocker. Those were brutal winters but I did learn how to ski. I retired in 1990 and became an MD80 ground school instructor at American Airlines for 24 years. So, I managed to stay in the aviation field after retirement from the USAF.
Rudy, thanks for sharing! I have lost track of most of my fellow KC-135 Navigators. It seems "life" gets in the way of so many things. But our common experiences will forever bond us together in many ways. By the time I got into the -135's the PINS was gone, and the Litton INS/DNS system was in place. Unfortunately, the accuracy of the INS gyros degraded quickly with use and time so that by the early 1990's the drift rate on those units often exceeded the manufacturers standards. We developed all sorts of tricks to keep the INS "close", but they were not always successful. The INS would only accept an update to its position as a function of the time that it had been operating. So, if it was 5 miles off after an hour in NAV mode, and you updated it with a corrected position, it would only accept a fraction of that update because it refused to believe it could be five miles off after only one hour! The damn INS had an ego! Fun times! Fortunately, when within 100 miles or so of a TACAN, we could TAC/MIX the INS, and it would "believe" more of the TACAN than it would our hand-jammed radar fix coordinates. I did have the experience of crossing the Pacific from Guam to Kadena with no INS, and no doppler. I used celestial and the winds off the weather sheet to guestimate drift angle and ground speed. I coasted in within 15 miles and 5 minutes. The Aircraft commander bought me breakfast the next day. ;-)
I flew B-52's in the USAF and after my time in the service, I flew many missions in a KC-135, flight testing the INSTALLED Inertial Navigation and Doppler system that replaced the need for the Palletized Inertial Nav (PINS) (1978-79). A great airplane and I hope those inertials helped ease concerns over the navigation problem.
I’m sure I must have sat in one of your Mad Dog recurrent ground school classes Rudy. Your name sounds familiar. I had a couple of stints on the 80 in that time period so I’m sure our paths had to cross at some point. I hope your retirement is going well Pete
I was a kc-135 crew chief (1976-1980) stationed at Pease AFB after multi jet engine tech school. I finished my enlistment at the tanker detachment at Travis AFB. Getting engine run certified and running engines was a real pleasure. Crew chiefs pulled a lot of alert duty and went TDY with the plane. I was never bored. This video brings back a lot of memories
Thanks for all you did, Norman! Crew Chiefs put in some mighty long hours keeping these old planes in good enough shape for us to take them airborne and break them again! It was a vicious cycle, and you all kept everything working no matter what. Much respect!!
@@TomScottMorgan30Thank you but I enjoyed working on tankers. Pease AFB was no fun in the winter. Deicing, pushing snow, and heating water for the old J57 engines were the most challenging. Life was much easier at Travis AFB with no snow and higher temperatures.
In the 60s my father was stationed at Eglin AFB in Florida. I was in my teens and rode my Honda 50 all over the base. On several occasions I was thrilled to be able to stop my bike at the end of the runway near the King Hanger off the road behind the blast deflector and watch as the B52 bomber wing was scrambled. I remembered the big guys taking off about 10 or 15 seconds apart but all of the videos I have watched they take off at much longer intervals. I thought I must have been wrong but this video shows I was probably right. Anyone that talks about how awesome a space shuttle launch was should have been there when they scrambled the whole darn wing.
And, it's always exciting to feel the plane keep rolling to the right while you have the yoke full left! It all seemed perfectly normal at the time. Only years later does it seem crazy. :)
I have stupid question for you. What do you do if get a «No go» light, bird strike or whatever that will stop you from getting air born? Do have take off power on until passed the Vr so you do not hinder the aircraft behind you?
It wasn't so much violent as it was HUGE. It would be most worrisome when shortly after you broke ground you'd notice the plane slowly descending and rolling right while the pilot would have the yoke pulled full back into his chest with full left aileron cranked in. That uncommanded "roll and sink" could continue for four or five agonizing seconds before it stopped. It felt like we were momentarily all passengers, and nobody was controlling the plane. The vortices off the wing tips of leading aircraft were very challenging to overcome for the following aircraft. If you could successfully avoid those vortices, then it was just a bit bumpy. It was obviously "doable", but you had to be prepared, aware, and aggressive in your corrections as things could get out of hand quickly. Heavy "A" model -135's were the most challenging to stay safe with. The later "R" model -135's had more thrust, a better climb rate, a larger horizontal stabilizer, and they eventually moved their aircraft separation targets out toward 30 seconds instead of the 12 seconds we aimed for in earlier days. We also used a technique involving "fan" headings, in which each aircraft would try to fly a pre-briefed heading say five degrees different than the aircraft ahead of them. So, for example if the runway heading was 320, then lead might fly 325, number two 320. number three 315, number four 310, etc.
@@TomScottMorgan30 I've seen a lot of videos with the 30-45 second spacing... very few like this with the true minimal 12 second spacing. I think 'worrisome' is a heck of a good word for wingtip vortices 12 seconds back off a B52 haha
"Air Disasters" has an episode about a tanker that had both engines ripped off one wing and the ones on the other wing barely hanging on due to wake turbulence from a passing tankers, I think during Desert Storm. They followed all passing protocol to the "T" but an unobserved strong wind took the turbulence straight to the victim!
This was the real deal!!!! There's nothing like getting your eardrums blown apart with this awesome noise from these airplanes. The "screaming" J-57 turbojets on both the B-52Gs and KC-135As here were very evident with their "water-injected" take-off sequences. There was so much smoke. Whoever must've filmed these airplanes taking-off, must've blown out their eardrums!!
I was stationed at Wurtsmith, March, and Fairchild AFBs from 1981-1996 when I retired. I watched KC-135A/E/Rs and B-52D/G/Hs doing close intervals. Never gets old. Watching the D models with the big tails taking off.
I heard about this being done for Commander's Day when was in aircraft mechanic school at Griffiss. Good place with great folks that have fallen on hard times since the base closed.
As a kid growing up in the 60s, Dad was stationed at McCoy AFB, Orlando Fl. During the Cuban missile crisis, these brave souls would be fully alerted weekly and sometimes twice weekly. One cell airborne 24/7, one cell idling one the ground, one cell on hot cocked alert and the 4th moving up to alert. When the horn blew, forget about seeing anything, (cart starts), hearing anything, (deafening roars), or even thinking for over 45 minutes as the defenders took to the sky. We were less than 200 miles I believe north of Castro's front yard. God bless them and their boss, General Le May, they stood up to and stood down the threat. Who would have thought that 22 years later I would become an F-16 crew chief? Kept Vipers in the air for 30 years and wouldn't trade it for anything. I like to think that we made those before us proud.
Mr. Sidv, I worked blk 5s that were upgraded to blk 10s, 10s, 15s, 25s, a few 30s, - 32s, 42s, 52s and the Iraqi desert Falcons. I might be slightly prejudiced, but to me, the Viper is a sexy, great flying and performing A/C.
Thanks for bringing back some memories. We lived at Griffiss twice during his career and we watched many MITOs from that exact spot. As great as seeing the ships take off from that end is, it was absolutely devastating when from that vantage point, the birds would taxi out in front of you and almost sit there quivering as the power came up and slowly inch forward under clouds of black smoke. Pretty awesome for a 10 year old. Thanks for the video and thanks for the records lookup process.
I flew several of these as a SAC crew dog but I've never seen a MITO from the ground, so thanks for the video. I was a B-52 Nav and RN, G's & H's, at Grand Forks (1978-1982) and Carswell (1983-1987).
I too was at Griffiss AFB NY between 1985 to 1989 as a crew chief on 62-3521 she was a A model then till later she followed me to Grissom AFBR as an R model. I really do miss those A's specially on MITTO ground shaking smoke-filled runway what a sight to see thanks for the video
Hi Pete!! We were both there the day this video was filmed. Except me and Doug Shaffer were already with 62-3513 at Stewart AFB during this exercise. I hope you’re doing well Brother, I miss those days………Ron Shaffer
Man, these are core memories. Between watching MITOs at Griffiss and getting (politely, relatively speaking) chased off the fence at Seneca Army Depot while watching the herd of white deer (the largest herd in the world!), comfortably knowing that in the event of a Russian ICBM strike I had a 100% chance of being instantly vaporized (somehow comforting, rather than knowing I was going to suffer) .. these are some of the best memories of my freshly-released-into-the-world youth. Thanks for sharing this and unlocking those memories!
Shorty after take off had you looked down you would've seen our house. Both my wife and I grew up in Rome, NY. After 50 years we to decided to move and now live in Lake Wales and sail on Crooked Lake. Thanks for the B52 memories...I still hear them overhead :-)...
I was a Tower Controller at Grand Forks for 3 1/2 years in the early 80's. These lannches were even more impressive in person! I have a Global Shield 1983 "flush" I filmed with a super 8 camera that I'm trying to find and have developed.
I, too, was a tanker nav between '77 and '82 at Carswell in Fort Worth and, of course, my required northern-tier sentence at Minot, ND. Thanks for this video, I was never a part of a MITO. I do remember three things from CCTS at Castle: 1) my instructor told me, with a choice between the attache-sized bag or the huge bag, take the small one because either way you're going to fill it up so make it easy on your back; 2) in one of the restroom stalls there was a Kilroy-type cartoon that said, "Be Alert! The Air Force needs more LERTS"; 3) first day the instructor was orienting us and soberly said, "Look, I know you probably don't want to be here in SAC. Yeah, I can tell you from experience that SAC sucks. But ... a suck for SAC is a blow for democracy." My first Atlantic crossing was in '78, during the day, DR's all the way to the Azores shooting sun lines every 20 minutes, pre-INS (even pre-palletized INS). When we got there and the co-pilot got a VOR/DME fix, we were 7 miles from my DR position.
Thanks for sharing, Steve! Looking back now, we did some amazing things using some pretty rudimentary procedures with old equipment all being performed by very young crews. By the time I started flying 135's we did have the INS. Our saying was: "Follow the INS and go wrong with confidence!". Toward the end of my flying career, the INS units were very worn and tired. For overland flying, a Tacan-mixed DNS was more dependable than the INS because the INS was programmed to not believe too much of any updates based on how long it had been in NAV mode. So, for example, if it was 7 miles off after 2 hours, it would not accept that it could actually be that far off in just two hours - so it would only "correct" a mile or three. The DNS was like a puppy dog - it believed every update you gave it. Of course, that was a double-edged sword. Many a DNS landed in a different country than the rest of the airplane. Hah!
@@TomScottMorgan30 As a tanker nav in the early 1970s---what's an INS?---- I once tried Pressure Pattern on a fighter drag to Guam, just to see if it would give me a usable LOP. Well, lo and behold, it did! Then I tried to explain to my copilot how comparing the difference between pressure altitude and absolute (radar) altitude from two DRs over a time period of steady cruise would permit assuming a drift offset, because of cyclonic winds around low-pressure centers. Ha! In the 920th ARS, the navs would hand out bananas to the copilots. It was known that copilots would invariably hold bananas in their right hands. After that, all you had to do was say, "Turn 30 degrees banana."
SAC Motto: "Peace is our Profession". The idea was to be so capable and so competent that nobody could imagine attacking us without suffering devasting losses. It worked.
I flew B-52's. I believe I was in one MITO. Before that I flew a C-47 in Vietnam out of Saigon. THERE the tower would hold us from takeoff, after the takeoff of a B747 or a C-5A because the wing turbulence off one of those big aircraft would flip us over 180 degress. One can appreciate the dangers of wake turbulence in a MITO, when attempting to follow 8 or 9 big aircraft, like the B-52 or even the KC-135, after a MITO takeoff...especially with all the smoke to confuse the issue. Also a warm outside air temperature would be exacerbated by all that engine heat in a MITO takeoff. Takeoff roll distance was greatly extended by the temperature of the air flowing into the engines. ANOTHER factor to worrry about.
Awesome video Tom! I just finished a joint project for the USAF and Navy a few months back involving the T-1A Jayhawk, which is the primary training platform for students that will be entering either airlift or tanker operations. My role was to conduct functional check flights prior to and after the installation of the Navy’s new (CSO) Combat System Operator hardware/software training package. The flying was great and presented some unique and challenging situations. John
I passed through March AFB several times in my flying days. Being a flat-lands and southeastern US native, I found the surrounding mountains rather intimidating - particularly while flying KC-135A's that could struggle with trying to achieve a 2,000' per minute rate of climb when heavy. (...I did not enjoy looking UP at the ground!) It was beautiful terrain otherwise. ;-)
@@TomScottMorgan30 I never really was intimidated by the " hills" around the " Moreno Valley" ( Riverside county), much however I grew up and flew in Alaska, I do have great memories of those last great years of SAC!!🇺🇲
Griffis.. Now thats one big base. Im from buffalo and when i was little my father was in the 914th NF. We did alot of camping in the Adirondacks and would always stop by the commissary and Bx for a weeks worth of provisions for the trip. Great vid ty
Tom, I was also a crew member on a 135 but it was in the mid 70's. Looking at this video really nothing changed from then, loud and smoky... lol. Stationed at Plattsburgh where we had FB-111's so our mito takeoffs were not so bad with wake turbulence. I had two experiences with mito takeoffs with B-52's and your right, lots of turbulence but being 5th in a 5 tanker mito was no picnic.. Looking for guys who see this video who were in the 380 ARS or 310 ARS. Like to get in contact with some of you guys.
I was a boomer in the 70's and can attest to the unpleasantness of the ride if you in the back of the pack. But it was pure exhilaration and I wouldn't have traded my job for anything.
...Ah yes! The exhilaration of feeling the plane roll violently to the right while the pilot has the yoke twisted full left... and yet that right roll continues! You yell "bank angle" across the cockpit as your loaded tanker swings past 30 degrees - but your call is pointless as ALL the left alerion in your world is already dialed in. So you just sit there and watch as the pilots grimace, and you pray. Somewhere near 40 degrees of bank your deep swing stops, and slowly ... too slowly ... the heavy beast begins to respond to all the "lefty" control inputs ...and the right wing begins to rise! But, this is no time to let out a "sigh of relief" as you dutifully call out "..110 seconds water!" (...meaning that in about ten seconds, your water augmentation will be done, and you are about to loose 4,400 lbs of thrust, whether you like it or not.) And on cue, the water runs out - just as promised. The pilot pushes the nose down to maintain a sustainable airspeed. You are only 600' feet AGL ...no wait, 575' ...no 550'...CRAP.. But, somehow, at around 500' AGL, the airspeed has climbed back up to 180 knots, and slowly ...too slowly .. you actually climb. You watch the trees seemingly fly by the co-pilots head for what seems an eternity as your heavily loaded tanker struggles upward. You hear your lead pilot advise ATC that this flight of four will be unable to maintain a standard 2,500' per minute rate of climb. Meanwhile, using your ancient radar, you coax your pilot to slide further right so your plane can get above the tankers ahead of you while staying out of their wake turbulence. For the first time since rotation, you look down and see that half your nav gear has slid and/or bounced off the nav table in front you of you. Seeing your plight, the boom operator unstraps and gathers up both your plotter and dividers which managed to land on the sextant stool in front of the electrical cabinet. Yup, it's going to be one of those days..... ;-)
@@TomScottMorgan30 Yep that about describes it. Not to mention the receivers who's goal is to kill the boom operator. Yet, I still managed to enjoy my job.
Thank you for your service. I was an AF Fuels Specialist but medically could not become a boomer. I was still proud to wear the uniform and support our country, if on the ground. :)
@@TomScottMorgan30 thanks for that. I noticed what you described in the clip. I didn't know about the water, interesting. As a kid in the 70's living on Vancouver island under the flight path 4-6 in formation would fly north in morning and a southern pack later in the day. Other planes just a spot in the sky but the 52, you could see features it's so big.
@@TomScottMorgan30 Those we’re the good days of flying. SAC kept us on our toes ensuring that we would get where we needed to be to keep this country safe. I enjoyed my career as a Boom Operator, and my kinship with my Navigators. Thanks for your service. Boom Operator forever. Dreamweaver, retired 1995.
I grew up 7 mile from the end of the runway at Griffis AFB in NY. Plus I was stationed there as a jet engine tech for the 416 bomb wing. Saw this procedure on many occasions. There’s nothing like having them fly over the house at 2000 feet at 0200 hours at full power!
I grew up outside of Carswell AFB in Ft. Worth. I attended school outside the base In Second grade. Those big B52s would fly out of Carswell right over our campus about 1 mile from the end of the runways, like that often. Instruction would stop. The ground and building would shake. Then it was over. We went back to Math or reading. Wild times. ⚡️💪🏽Peace, the old fashioned way⚡️💪🏽
I can’t count the times I sat on stand-by during MITOs back in the 80’s. Whether it was in a P-2, on the P-15, or the P-10 rescue truck, this brings back memories. The only thing missing is the JP-4 exhaust fumes. Firefighter, Wurtsmith AFB, 81-83, Castle 85-93.
Wow. While stationed at Randolph from 87-92 went to yearly conferences at the nearby Rome Air Development Center. Used to see some bombers and tankers, which wasn't something an officer in my career field saw often.
After all the info I've read, or crash investigation videos about wake turbulence crashes I've seen, watching this makes me a bit uneasy to see. But since there were no adverse effects from these minimal separations on t/o I guess it all worked out! It was a powerful scene to watch, I must say! Incredible!
For those asking what happens if any of them have to abort, I asked a former Buff pilot that once. He said they would focus on the speed brakes of the a/c in front of them. If those deployed, it meant an abort so you would also immediately abort, and anyone behind you would do the same. Since the lead a/c would be going faster, everyone could abort safely if they did it right away. He wasn’t ever aware of it happening IRL. I imagine with eight engines it would a very serious problem before they’d have to reject a takeoff.
@ND5280 B-52's do not have ailerons. So, they use spoilers (speed brakes) to level the wings - or turn. It would not be unusual to see a B-52 taking off with the spoilers being alternatingly deployed - especially when in the wake turbulence of aircraft ahead of them. Add the smoke and steam left over the runway if winds are light or right down the runway, and the ability to see, recognize, comprehend, and react to seeing the spoilers UP on an aircraft ahead may be a problem. For sure, you would react to whatever you saw and became aware of. But the most likely way to learn of an abort was via a radio call. The aircraft aborting would call out that they were aborting and their speed. If you were above their speed, you continued. If you were below their speed, you aborted too. I do not know what the rules were before 1983, but for my time in SAC, I never recall doing MITO's at night. If it was dark, we did a cell departure with 45 second(ish) spacing. At night, you would never see the speed brakes or spoilers of an aircraft ahead of you. So, radio calls were the most likely way. Also, there was a Supervisor Of Flying (SOF), as well as (usually) the Director of Operations (DO) as well as sometimes even the Wing Commander out on the airfield as well. If any of them noticed any incidents (accident, abort, emergency, anomaly, etc.), they would call it out. Of course, this is for exercises like we see in the subject video. If it was a real world response or (more likely) an "Inadvertent Klaxon" (ooops!), then the crews had no "adult supervision" and would do their best to see and avoid - with radio calls being the primary means of keeping planes apart. I experienced several "moving" exercises at night where we would roll out of the alert facility and onto the runway and briefly set take-off power and then roll to the end and exit. I never took off. In fact, I never took off at maximum gross weight EVER. But, I did watch a KC-135 take off out of Robin's AFB GA at 322,500 lbs (max weight), so I was comfortable that we could do it.
I would be playing in the back yard in Austin, Texas when the Wing would come back to Bergstrom. We were dead center on the approach and the 52s would come right over the top of us. I remember my dad would come out and watch with me because we only had one TV channel KTBC #7 and there was no watching when this happened because every bomber going over would interfere with the signal. Col. Harry Lester was our neighbor and he was an aircraft commander and had the red phone on the 100' cord he would take with him in the back yard. I ended up spending 50+ years in the cockpit and in no small part to him and growing up there.
Grew up in Merced (Castle AFB) in the 70s. They would do alerts sometimes and flew right over the high school. Teachers would just give up trying to talk.😂
Actually, there were procedures established to handle that. The aircraft aborting would call out on the radio their abort, and which side of the runway they were moving toward (pick one!). If you were ahead of the aborting aircraft, you continued. If you were behind the aborter, you executed a sympathetic abort (you aborted too) until you either heard the aborting aircraft call clear of the runway - or could see you were clear. (...not easy as the runway enviornment was often covered with smoke and steam) There was also a SOF (Supervisor Of Flying) in a radio equipped car on the airfield to assist with keeping the crews aware of the situation and to call out for specific actions based on their perspective. The KC-135A models were "committed to flight" surprisingly early in their take-off roll at high gross weights,. By the time you hit around 120ish knots or so, you were not going to stop on the runway no matter what. Rotate speed for a fully loaded KC-135A on an average 72°F day near sea level was about 169 knots with flaps 30. Once you passed about 120 knots but were below 169 knots, anything that went "serious wrong" was likely gonna kill you. But of course, the thermals from your fireball would possibly help the guys following you get a little more seperation from the ground. So there was that.😆
Typically three on the runway - one near rotation speed, one about 3,000 feet behind passing 100 knots, and one lining up on centerline setting takeoff thrust - doing about 20 knots. Everybody else rolling behind at around 10-15 knots trying to optimize spacing. A good trick for getting the best spacing was to look at the aircraft ahead and adjust your distance so that the imagined axle of their nose gear appeared to align with their aft fuselage. If you held that and followed their track, you would be pretty close to the target spacing of 12 seconds (typically).
Wow!!! If you lived a short distance away, and didn't know that this was a practice scramble, that would have been scary. :) Duck n cover time. ;D Leave it up! I've got some pilot friends who would love to see this.
Yeah. That was not good. At least by the time I flew "A" models, the water injection system had been redesigned to give you a fighting chance. The original system was split left and right. So, if it failed you could loose all injection on one side. After a few spectacular accidents, they changed it to an inboard and outboard design. If we lost part of it the remaining system would be symmetrical. Our joke was that at least we would get to choose what we hit as we went down!
I soent many many days on thr observation point, as a kid. We'd ride our bikes around Perimeter rd and hang out to watch aircraft do touch n go's. Now its blocked off, and the road up to the point is overgrown.
I did 2 years there at the Griff. 1987-1989. SPS. I loved watching a KLAXON. We had a few “generations” when I was there. Never fun for a new Airman. Guarding Wonder Woman’s plane for 12 hours. Glad I did it! 🇺🇸🫡
I wonder how much less fuel the new RR engines will use. Will they cause the range to be much more? just curious. B-52 is an amazing beast, glad they are on my side.
@hisaddle I have seen no published estimates yet. I imagine we will hear nothing until they get into flight test. However, based on the cost of the program, I think we can expect a double digit reduction in fuel consumption, a corresponding increase in range, and a great reduction in maintenance hours required while providing (perhaps) even a modest increase in thrust. This should also reduce dependency on tankers for air refueling on some missions. The engines should also be slightly quieter, which surrounding communities may appreciate. Overall, it should all be a positive as long as cost overruns are successfully avoided.
Tom Scott, did you know a Tanker navigator named David Kelly? He was us there in NY about this same time, 1985 or so. He was a friend of mine who washed out of pilot training and went back to his old job as Navigator.
I did not know David Kelly - but we may have crossed paths. There were about 3,000 KC-135 Navigators in a typical fiscal year, and it was amazing how small and familiar we were. I did not move around as much as many. I enjoyed the southern (less cold) places and tended to "homestead" there. For example, I spent eight years at Warner Robins AFB GA, and six years at MacDill AFB FL - that's 14 years of my 20 year career in the warm toasty south. 😊 But, there was lots of TDY, training, confrences, bomb comps, PME, and countless other opportunities to meet fellow Navs. I may have met David somwhere along the way, but I don't recall. (Another side affect of aging!) 😊
@@TomScottMorgan30 Thanks for the reply Tom. Oh by the way, what do Navigators do after 20 years in the USAF? Several of my friends were USAF pilots and went to the airlines after the USAF. Just curious.
I was 42 years old when I "retired" from the USAF. So, I moved to where I wanted to live and got a few other non-flying jobs (in my case with local government) and worked until age 59 - and retired for "real'. Now, I go sailing a few days each week and keep up with house, car, boat, and yard maintenance on those days my wife and/or I am not having doctors maintain us!😨 Anyway, there is no more flying - and I am fine with that. Flying reqires a level of skill and proficiency that would be difficult to maintain at this point in my life. Military flying was very demanding and the scheduling of it was very taxing - it was definitely a young persons job because there is not much sleep, crazy hours, and constant training between deployments. Sailing requires a bit of the same skill and proficiency attributes, but if I screw up and spin out of control in my sailboat, I might be going ...7 knots? (..Much better than "losing it" at 500 knots! 😆) I'm glad I was able to be a navigator as a young man, but I'm also glad that I don't have to do that job anymore. It was very demanding work and mistakes could be disasterous - there was lots of pressure to perform perfectly every time. (One bad day flying could kill you.) I miss it sometimes - but not too much. 😊
@@TomScottMorgan30 I was in SAC when I was in the USAF 1971-75. I was a crew member on a Titan II ICBM. Spent many alerts down in the silos. I was also on an Instructor crew and that took lots of extra time and work. I stayed in only 4 years. I planned on staying in at least 20 but my wife left me for a KC-135 pilot. What a bummer. Thanks Tom
Rob, I actually wanted to be a missle launch officer. However, I applied for an ROTC scholarship, and they said - in order to get it - I would have to be a navigator. I did not want to make the USAF a career. I figured I would go into missles, get a masters degree while on alert, and leave for a civilian life. But, taking the ROTC scholarship with a "Nav Slot" meant I owed the USAF six years - not four. Other commitments for PME, upgrades, PCS's, plus the Desert Storm "stop loss" left me with ten years in before I could leave. Since those first ten years went by so fast, I eventually decided to stay in and try to survive for 20 years. I was fine with the service, and enjoyed much of it, but it was very hard on my family, and not exactly what I planned, but it worked out ok. I retired the first day I could - 20 years, 2 days, 4 hours and 16 minutes! 😆 Looking back, my years in the USAF were some of the most satisfying of my life. I enjoyed the incredible amount of responsibility I was given at such a young age, and the amount of judgement and leeway I was given to "make things happen" as I rose through the ranks. If I had to do it all over again, I would - but I'm not sure my family would approve. 😊
I used to watch this on the regular from the roof of my parents' house near KMHR (former Mather AFB-SAC/ATC) Then, the 320th bomb wing and 940th ARG would do a MITO practice alert once a month. SO cool, yet scary thinking what they were capable of. On another note, the aircraft, say past #3 had to be flying thru the most ungodly wake turbulence. I'm wondering how many on board needed dental work after a ride like that. #USAF #B52 #KC135 #SAC
Does anyone know if the KCs were supposed to refuel the 52s on the way to their target? I don't understand why they're taking off together. I thought the BUFFs were designed to fly straight there.
The reason they are taking off together is to survive. The exercise is practicing a scenario in which they are responding to a nuclear attack that is inbound to the United States. In many cases, the bombers would be refueled by co-located tankers. But there were also tankers coming from bases that had no bombers to join in support of these bombers. Yes, in many instances, some B-52's had enough fuel to get to the points from which they could launch their weapons without meeting a tanker. But it was the tankers' fuel that would give them time to loiter so that their weapons' arrival at the target could be "better choreographed." Tankers also gave them the fuel necessary to find a surviving base to recover to. Tankers would also be a key resource in helping reconstitute the surviving forces for follow-on strikes after the initial exchange. Overall, air refueling tankers increased the flexibility of the airborne arm of the "Triad" of nuclear forces. Once an ICBM or SLBM is launched, there is no ability to alter or recall that missile. But, manned bombers - mated with tankers - allowed for greater flexibility ...and even the ability to recall forces after launch if warranted. The tankers launched with the bombers simply to try and survive the first exchanges and increase the time available for the surviving authorities to manage the chaos. Hope this clarifies!
I was at KI Sawyer from 82-86. B-52's could carry so much fuel that they were incapable of taking off if they were full. They were loaded so that they could quickly get to altitude to take all the fuel that the KC-135 was carrying. The KC-135's were to give the B-52 every last drop they had insomuch as they couldn't return to the base. The KC-135's had a pre-planned ditch point on the Canadian side of Lake Superior. In the 80's, a B-52's chances of returning from a mission was 30:1. Realistically, the KC-135 pilots had a single job that lasted about 30 minutes......take off....refuel the buff.....ditch the plane.....and they were done.
Are they capable of doing the same drill today with this many aircraft. Very impressive. Had this been a real event event those camera people would have been vaporized shortly after take off
No. Today's crews no longer train to this level - Strategic Air Command (SAC) is gone. Additionally, the "upgraded" navigational systems aircrews depend upon today (..in lieu of a Navigator) require substantially functioning electrical components and systems that will likely be inoperative after the first Electro Magnetic Pulse (EMP) of any nearby nuclear weapon detonation. SAC Navigators had the ability to use dead reckoning (DR) and celestial navigation (CEL) techniques to roughly accomplish the mission with little more than a compass, clock, sextant, paper charts, and almanac tables. Today, KC-135's are flown (mostly) without navigators. If today's tanker crews had no electronics or functioning navigation systems, their mission effectiveness rate under nuclear attack would likely be near zero. I do not know if today's bomber crews are trained in more traditional navigational techniques. But even if they are, I am certain their proficiency is nothing near what SAC crews had in "the day". Times have changed and so have plans for preparing for war. The bombers can now carry weapons that allow them to launch from a far greater distance away from their targets than SAC had. (....So, the number of tanker's needed may be greatly reduced as a result.) And, the ability to reliably launch the "Air Arm" of the Triad while under attack may now simply be too expensive to maintain. They now do what they can with what they've got. Once the KC-135's are finally "replaced" by the new KC-46, the same quick-response capability you see here (..where crews run out to a "cocked-on" aircraft and launch in minutes) will be lost, too. So, there is no going back. The new systems coming on line are not truly "quick launch under attack" capable like SAC tried to be. The new systems seem to assume WE will control the time and conditions of their use - not an attacker. We can just hope that all the judgements being made are sound ones. Based on my prior knowledge of how these types of decisions are actually made, I believe they are. (...But, I admit I could be wrong.) As always, time will tell!
I didn’t know they had dead reckoning and celestial navigation incase the electronics went out. Thanks for the info. Also: how would you look at the stars in a kc135? Would you need to go into the cockpit and look up through one of the pilots upwards facing windows?
@internetrules8522 We had a periscopic sextant and two windows either side of it on top of the aircraft and just behind the Navigator seat. The windows were later removed after a couple of accidents in which they failed at altitude killing a boom operator who was taking a cell shot for the navigator.
@internetrules8522 Also, we didn't just have dead reckoning and celestial in case the electronics went out. We also had it because that was the best way for us to navigate considering we had few electronics. So, we operated that way all the time. DR was the primary means of navigation, and radar was the primary means of obtaining fixes over or near land. Over water or the poles (ice), celestial replaced radar. Today's 135's fly without navigators except in very rare circumstances or special missions. GPS provides position accuracy within yards. Celestial could get us within miles. ;-)
And just about the time one thought it couldn't get ANY LOUDER-they'd turn the damn water on. Spent a few months at Kadena AB in the very early 80's-nothing but A mod 135's then. Those beasts were honest to God noisier than a SR-71 taking off. They would always launch 2 135's-then Habu would make it's appearance & head out for parts unknown.
Hi Sidney - this was part of the (then) annual Global Shield Exercise. The actual "alert" aircraft were pulled off alert, de-armed and de-fueled, and then every flyable aircraft on the base (with a crew available) was generated and placed on exercise alert. The aircraft actually used "peace time" requirements in terms of take-off weight and engine out data, and none were close to their EWO ( Emergency War Order) limits - other than the timing between aircraft was the same as in an actual alert launch. With SAC gone, I don't believe this capability is practiced anymore ...so this is truly a piece of history.
@@TomScottMorgan30 Yeah, and they always seemed to kick off those no-notice exercises on a Friday afternoon. A klaxon about lunchtime on Friday? That's the sweet sound of everyone losing their days off. You know those plans you had for this weekend? Wah wah wahhhhh.... (sad tormbones) Good old SAC. It was a great experience and I wouldn't mind being that young again but I don't know if I'd want to re-live those days all over. Lots of pressure and responsibility on some very young people.
I loved having that pressure and responsibility. It was also pretty funny sometimes - like on my first TDY to Hawaii with a 24 year old Aircraft Commander, a 24 year old Copilot, and me as a 23 year old Navigator,along with a 20 year old boom operator. After landing our multi-million dollar KC-135A tanker in Hawaii (..also carrying 44 passengers in the back), none of us on the crew could rent a car to see the island. ...You had to be 25 to rent a car!
My question is, how can they see... following the closeness of each aircraft...the heavy smoke builds up....they must have instruments that they go by in this almost zero visibility.
Safe separation was created and maintained by: 1) The initial spacing - 12 seconds was the target for "like" aircraft. 2) The use of "fan headings" in which each follow-on aircraft turned 10 degrees further to one side than the aircraft ahead. 3) The use of the APN-59 radar (operated by a navigator) who could provide a heading to avoid a conflict. In large cell departures, it was not uncommon for crews flying several spots back from the lead aircraft to not see the aircraft ahead of them until they were able to climb above them. The trailing aircraft typically stacked up above the lead aircraft 500' or so. This altitude separation was an additional means of avoiding a collision, and it also made it possible for the navigators to use the radar to track the planes ahead by tilting the antenna downward slightly. There was no such thing as TCAS, no GPS, and no other means to effectively maintain position. We could use Air-to-Air TACAN to determine distance from another aircraft, but this was very much a crude "analog"system. Once you were inside a mile, it couldn't really display a distance that would be useable to guarantee separation. Bottom line: The procedures reduced the likelihood of a collision. If "blind" due to smoke, clouds, weather, or darkness, maintaining separation became the primary job of the navigator using a primitive radar.
No. The bombers could be pretty close, but the tankers not so much. They could certainly do a "scramble exercise" that would look similiar - but the totality of this "exercise" was demonstration of a capability that is lost today. The "problem" is today's reliance on electronics for navigation. In a nuclear war scenario, that is a huge problem because things like GPS, INS, navaids on the ground... everything external and electronic used to navigate the aircraft is GONE once nukes (EMP) start popping off. That is why these planes you see here had navigators on board. The Navs were real anachronisms in the day. They could use dead reckoning, celestial navigation, paper charts, dividers, plotters, and a watch to position the aircraft and direct it to where it needed to be. There are few (if any) classically capable navigators flying today. Those skills have been lost to time. I doubt there is anybody left who could teach such skills. So, while we could scramble planes to try and survive a nuclear attack, our ability to actually use those planes as effective weapons in a nuclear environment is suspect. It would depend on how resistant the wiring and systems of these 60-70 year old planes prove to be against an electromagnetic pulse created by a nuclear detonation. Back when I flew them, our expectation was that all but the most basic systems would fail or degrade. That is why we used to fly navigation legs without INS/DNS, radar, or radio beacons. Just an airspeed meter, doppler, compass, watch, sextant, tables, almanac, charts, and flight log sheet ...and pencils and erasers. Lots of erasers. Nearly everything could fail, and we could still get close. I doubt crews today could function with systems as degraded or rudimentary as we used. So, I say "no". We can not do this same thing today. There is nobody on board today who can navigate when all the glass screens are blank.
Hi Tom, I noticed from your previous video post of Cold Play, you stated that would be starting a new job (good for you). I’m curious, are you still in the industry (aviation), or did you leave the field when you separated from the Air Force? Anyway, I hope your new career doesn’t keep you away from entertaining us with your sailing adventures!! Hope I’m not being to nosey- John
5 หลายเดือนก่อน
I guess this is before the advent of image stabilization and tripods because it hurts my eyes.
Fun Fact KC crew was expected to dump every last drop of fuel into the bombers then bail out and hope for the best in the Arctic or ocean. Yikes. I was in CAP and spent a summer week at Pease. I can tell you the food there would have made it worth it. Well, compared to my Mom's alleged cooking.
@billwendell6886 That is mostly folklore. Missions were planned to allow the tankers to have enough fuel to recover at their planned base. However, because of the nature of this particular mission, the bombers could request all the tanker fuel available. Again, this was not planned to happen, but there were procedures in place to allow for it. The tankers were allowed to keep enough fuel to maneuver clear of the refueling track and flame out. Then, you could glide for as long as you could toward shore, or a picket ship, or an island, or whatever you could find.
I was at KI Sawyer from 82-86. Our KC-135 pilots had a ditch point in Canada on the north side of Lake Superior. The odds of the B-52 returning from a mission was 30:1.....so there was no need for the tanker to return to the base. They'd give the B-52 everything they had.
My brother was a radar navigator on LURE 75 and was killed on April 11th, 1983 on Square Top Mountain in Utah. I visited the site last week. What a chilling and surreal experience. Love you always brother. Fly high.
Hi Doug. What a small world. I lived next door to the widow of the aircraft commander of Lure 75 in Warner Robin's GA - her name was Pam. She was devastated by the loss of her husband Don, and had quite a struggle to regain her balance. We lost a lot of good people in training. The generals insisted that we would fight the way we trained, so our training was very realistic - and included significant risk. Limits were pushed, and risks were taken. Sometimes we learned valuable lessons and became more capable. Occasionally, while striving for excellence, good people died. The crew of Lure 75 were among the best.
@@TomScottMorgan30 Thank you Tom
🫡🇺🇸
There is “nothing” as impressive as an entire wing of BUFF’s scrambling and levitating into the air 10-15 sec apart. Back in the day these guys knew they had at best 20 min before warheads so every scramble they made it count. I am humbled by their dedication.
And even after they lifted off, there was no assurrance the Soviets wouldn't target points off the ends of the runway (as well as the field itself) in order to destroy them as they departed the vicinity.
"Back in the day" - what do you mean? Do they no longer do these excercises? I'm genuinely asking, not trying to be rude.
@@Petidani0330 No, the Air Force and the US miltary does them as part of emergency exercises in case of nuclear attack. Look at all the recent NATO exercises.
@@BHill-rz9tg Thank you!
The RAF did a 4 Vulcan QRA at one of the Finningley airshows late 60s. So close one would be lifting off as the next started its roll. The ground quaked for several minutes.
When I watched this, all I could think about was the wake turbulence. I attended Nav School in 1989-1990, and I arrived at Mather AFB in September 1989, one week after all the BUFFs stationed there departed the field for the last time. I was told it was quite a show.
While at Mather, I got to fly the T-37, and as we were flying in to the base, we followed a C-5 while going in. We were three miles out, and a thousand feet of separation. Due to the wake turbulence, it was a hell of a bumpy ride all the way down to the runway. I've never done a MITO, but having had a taste of the wake turbulence while flying behind that C-5, I get a tiny taste and a little bit of a sense of what it must have been like for you guys at the back of the pack.
Cheers from one Nav to another.
@randallulrich One "advantage" to the smokey and steamy exhausts of all the planes was that you could pretty much see the turbulent air - at least for the first few jets. It was generally better to have a slight crosswind rather than have the wind coming straight down the runway. That way, the vorticies would move off to one side, while you could sorta slide out to the other. When you watch the video and see a plane banking hard to one side shortly after becoming airborne, it is generally for one of two reasons: 1) They are maneuvering to try and avoid the vorticies, or 2) They are passing through the vorticies and are being tossed around.
For me, the bank angle swings were not as alarming as the pitch occilations. I did not like decending during climb out. The plane just felt like it was mushing downward for several seconds, and acceleration was slow. For exercise (peace time) scenarios, we might have a gross weight of perhaps 280,000 lbs. Max. That would give us a rotate speed of around 170 knots at 20 degree flaps, or slightly less if we needed 30 degrees of flaps. We'd spend the first two minutes with water injection, and perhaps get to 180 knots... but as soon as the water ran out, you'd lose about 5-6,000 lbs. of thrust. If you didn't lower the nose a bit, the airspeed would drop off fast, and of course the wake turbulence was still everywhere. It was challenging, which is why we had to practice often to stay proficient. I think pilots and Navs had to do a MITO as number 2 (or beyond) once every 45 days to stay current. In practice, we typically got one every 30 days as part of a two ship. These large scale exercises like you see in the video were annual things that were not entirely routine. But, crews could deploy to the Pacific, Alaska, or Mildenhall UK throughout the year, and those deployments often provided further opportunities for large cell departures.
I participated in a large cell departure out of Kadena AB circa 1984 that had 24 KC-135's and 36 F-15's. The turbulence was insane, but we were able to move to one side and stay clear of the closest vorticies.
Nobody on our crew was over 25 years old. So none of us were "experienced". We laughed about it because we could not rent a car in Hawaii, but we COULD fly a tanker all over the Pacific and make life or death decisions without "adult supervision." For all of us, that was the appeal of the Air Force ....great responsibility at a very young age. Best times of our lives!
I, too, was a KC-135 nav. I was "drafted" into the KC-135 after my last assignment in AC-130 gunships in 1973. The memories of being in tankers is one that forever be remembered with great fondness. There was nothing greater feeling than flying across the "Pond" without a GPS or navigating over the polar region; just using celestial means to get there. I never flew with the PINS {Palletized Inertial Navigation System). Remembered my very young Boomer mooning a BUFF, after refueling, during an ORI! The alerts, the ORIs, the TDYs, were all part of being in SAC. I spent 5 years at Loring AFB and for a South Texas local, it was a shocker. Those were brutal winters but I did learn how to ski. I retired in 1990 and became an MD80 ground school instructor at American Airlines for 24 years. So, I managed to stay in the aviation field after retirement from the USAF.
Rudy, thanks for sharing!
I have lost track of most of my fellow KC-135 Navigators. It seems "life" gets in the way of so many things. But our common experiences will forever bond us together in many ways.
By the time I got into the -135's the PINS was gone, and the Litton INS/DNS system was in place. Unfortunately, the accuracy of the INS gyros degraded quickly with use and time so that by the early 1990's the drift rate on those units often exceeded the manufacturers standards. We developed all sorts of tricks to keep the INS "close", but they were not always successful. The INS would only accept an update to its position as a function of the time that it had been operating. So, if it was 5 miles off after an hour in NAV mode, and you updated it with a corrected position, it would only accept a fraction of that update because it refused to believe it could be five miles off after only one hour! The damn INS had an ego! Fun times! Fortunately, when within 100 miles or so of a TACAN, we could TAC/MIX the INS, and it would "believe" more of the TACAN than it would our hand-jammed radar fix coordinates. I did have the experience of crossing the Pacific from Guam to Kadena with no INS, and no doppler. I used celestial and the winds off the weather sheet to guestimate drift angle and ground speed. I coasted in within 15 miles and 5 minutes. The Aircraft commander bought me breakfast the next day. ;-)
I flew B-52's in the USAF and after my time in the service, I flew many missions in a KC-135, flight testing the INSTALLED Inertial Navigation and Doppler system that replaced the need for the Palletized Inertial Nav (PINS) (1978-79). A great airplane and I hope those inertials helped ease concerns over the navigation problem.
I’m sure I must have sat in one of your Mad Dog recurrent ground school classes Rudy. Your name sounds familiar. I had a couple of stints on the 80 in that time period so I’m sure our paths had to cross at some point. I hope your retirement is going well
Pete
I was a kc-135 crew chief (1976-1980) stationed at Pease AFB after multi jet engine tech school. I finished my enlistment at the tanker detachment at Travis AFB. Getting engine run certified and running engines was a real pleasure. Crew chiefs pulled a lot of alert duty and went TDY with the plane. I was never bored. This video brings back a lot of memories
Thanks for all you did, Norman! Crew Chiefs put in some mighty long hours keeping these old planes in good enough shape for us to take them airborne and break them again! It was a vicious cycle, and you all kept everything working no matter what. Much respect!!
@@TomScottMorgan30Thank you but I enjoyed working on tankers. Pease AFB was no fun in the winter. Deicing, pushing snow, and heating water for the old J57 engines were the most challenging. Life was much easier at Travis AFB with no snow and higher temperatures.
In the 60s my father was stationed at Eglin AFB in Florida. I was in my teens and rode my Honda 50 all over the base. On several occasions I was thrilled to be able to stop my bike at the end of the runway near the King Hanger off the road behind the blast deflector and watch as the B52 bomber wing was scrambled. I remembered the big guys taking off about 10 or 15 seconds apart but all of the videos I have watched they take off at much longer intervals. I thought I must have been wrong but this video shows I was probably right. Anyone that talks about how awesome a space shuttle launch was should have been there when they scrambled the whole darn wing.
The air force changed the interval times between launches for an increased safety margin. I can't remember what year my dad told me that took place.
Thanks for posting. Now I can show my young whippersnapper grandson just what the Old Man used to do!
I’m flying the second to last B52. Exciting takeoff with greatly reduced visibility due to the water injected engines in all the leading aircraft.
And, it's always exciting to feel the plane keep rolling to the right while you have the yoke full left!
It all seemed perfectly normal at the time. Only years later does it seem crazy. :)
I have stupid question for you. What do you do if get a «No go» light, bird strike or whatever that will stop you from getting air born? Do have take off power on until passed the Vr so you do not hinder the aircraft behind you?
@@TomScottMorgan30What was the Tail number?
@@JeffreyWilliams-dr7qe You'd have to ask Chris Warner above. I flew tankers, not Buffs.
@@TomScottMorgan30 All the same source. Thank you!
That turbulence had to be VIOLENT. Amazing thing to be able to do with anything near the consistency and safety record you all managed in SAC.
It wasn't so much violent as it was HUGE. It would be most worrisome when shortly after you broke ground you'd notice the plane slowly descending and rolling right while the pilot would have the yoke pulled full back into his chest with full left aileron cranked in. That uncommanded "roll and sink" could continue for four or five agonizing seconds before it stopped. It felt like we were momentarily all passengers, and nobody was controlling the plane. The vortices off the wing tips of leading aircraft were very challenging to overcome for the following aircraft. If you could successfully avoid those vortices, then it was just a bit bumpy. It was obviously "doable", but you had to be prepared, aware, and aggressive in your corrections as things could get out of hand quickly. Heavy "A" model -135's were the most challenging to stay safe with. The later "R" model -135's had more thrust, a better climb rate, a larger horizontal stabilizer, and they eventually moved their aircraft separation targets out toward 30 seconds instead of the 12 seconds we aimed for in earlier days. We also used a technique involving "fan" headings, in which each aircraft would try to fly a pre-briefed heading say five degrees different than the aircraft ahead of them. So, for example if the runway heading was 320, then lead might fly 325, number two 320. number three 315, number four 310, etc.
@@TomScottMorgan30 I've seen a lot of videos with the 30-45 second spacing... very few like this with the true minimal 12 second spacing. I think 'worrisome' is a heck of a good word for wingtip vortices 12 seconds back off a B52 haha
By the third or fourth aircraft those big ol' flexy wings and the spoilers on the BUFFs were flapping like a gooney bird.
@@Hide.the.Salami That’s the TRUTH
"Air Disasters" has an episode about a tanker that had both engines ripped off one wing and the ones on the other wing barely hanging on due to wake turbulence from a passing tankers, I think during Desert Storm. They followed all passing protocol to the "T" but an unobserved strong wind took the turbulence straight to the victim!
Heavy forever, 42nd Bomb Wing, 68-71 Line mechanic, always on the line or in the hanger and loved every minute of it
You got it done Joseph! Thanks for taking good care of the jets - those of us who followed benefitted from your hard work.
Proud veteran of Barksdale AFB, Shreveport LA. I was a radio technician. Worked on the KC-10s.
This was the real deal!!!! There's nothing like getting your eardrums blown apart with this awesome noise from these airplanes. The "screaming" J-57 turbojets on both the B-52Gs and KC-135As here were very evident with their "water-injected" take-off sequences. There was so much smoke. Whoever must've filmed these airplanes taking-off, must've blown out their eardrums!!
I was stationed at Wurtsmith, March, and Fairchild AFBs from 1981-1996 when I retired. I watched KC-135A/E/Rs and B-52D/G/Hs doing close intervals. Never gets old. Watching the D models with the big tails taking off.
Did the Ds still have the Vietnam era Big Belly modification to them, or were they returned to pre Vietnam deployment specs?
@@keithad6485 It Never changed because of the Nukes and they could still drop a lot of gravity bombs.
I heard about this being done for Commander's Day when was in aircraft mechanic school at Griffiss. Good place with great folks that have fallen on hard times since the base closed.
As a kid growing up in the 60s, Dad was stationed at McCoy AFB, Orlando Fl. During the Cuban missile crisis, these brave souls would be fully alerted weekly and sometimes twice weekly. One cell airborne 24/7, one cell idling one the ground, one cell on hot cocked alert and the 4th moving up to alert. When the horn blew, forget about seeing anything, (cart starts), hearing anything, (deafening roars), or even thinking for over 45 minutes as the defenders took to the sky. We were less than 200 miles I believe north of Castro's front yard. God bless them and their boss, General Le May, they stood up to and stood down the threat. Who would have thought that 22 years later I would become an F-16 crew chief? Kept Vipers in the air for 30 years and wouldn't trade it for anything. I like to think that we made those before us proud.
In 30 years on the Viper?!?!?! That is so cool. What all Blocks of the F-16 have you seen or worked on?
Mr. Sidv, I worked blk 5s that were upgraded to blk 10s, 10s, 15s, 25s, a few 30s, - 32s, 42s, 52s and the Iraqi desert Falcons. I might be slightly prejudiced, but to me, the Viper is a sexy, great flying and performing A/C.
Thanks for bringing back some memories. We lived at Griffiss twice during his career and we watched many MITOs from that exact spot. As great as seeing the ships take off from that end is, it was absolutely devastating when from that vantage point, the birds would taxi out in front of you and almost sit there quivering as the power came up and slowly inch forward under clouds of black smoke. Pretty awesome for a 10 year old.
Thanks for the video and thanks for the records lookup process.
Probably one of the most awesome vids of the heavies that I've ever seen. Thanks!
I flew several of these as a SAC crew dog but I've never seen a MITO from the ground, so thanks for the video. I was a B-52 Nav and RN, G's & H's, at Grand Forks (1978-1982) and Carswell (1983-1987).
I too was at Griffiss AFB NY between 1985 to 1989 as a crew chief on 62-3521 she was a A model then till later she followed me to Grissom AFBR as an R model. I really do miss those A's specially on MITTO ground shaking smoke-filled runway what a sight to see thanks for the video
Hi Pete!! We were both there the day this video was filmed. Except me and Doug Shaffer were already with 62-3513 at Stewart AFB during this exercise. I hope you’re doing well Brother, I miss those days………Ron Shaffer
Fairchild AFB MICAP 1986
I was stationed at Griffiss 1975-1977. I was assistant CC ON. 62-3521.
@@ozone385 62-3521 is still active isn't she?
My dad participated in these excercises as well he was a kc 135 navigator as well!
A nice tribute to the G models, watched an ORI, MITO at Ellsworth. There from 1976 to 1979, great memories
Been a while but certainly brought me back to my service at March, Anderson, and U Tapao!!
When I was flying for Uncle Sam in Germany, we had a bumper sticker on the car: Jet Noise-The Sound of Freedom.
Das ist gut !!! West German side...
Man, these are core memories. Between watching MITOs at Griffiss and getting (politely, relatively speaking) chased off the fence at Seneca Army Depot while watching the herd of white deer (the largest herd in the world!), comfortably knowing that in the event of a Russian ICBM strike I had a 100% chance of being instantly vaporized (somehow comforting, rather than knowing I was going to suffer) .. these are some of the best memories of my freshly-released-into-the-world youth.
Thanks for sharing this and unlocking those memories!
Shorty after take off had you looked down you would've seen our house. Both my wife and I grew up in Rome, NY. After 50 years we to decided to move and now live in Lake Wales and sail on Crooked Lake. Thanks for the B52 memories...I still hear them overhead :-)...
I was a Tower Controller at Grand Forks for 3 1/2 years in the early 80's. These lannches were even more impressive in person! I have a Global Shield 1983 "flush" I filmed with a super 8 camera that I'm trying to find and have developed.
I, too, was a tanker nav between '77 and '82 at Carswell in Fort Worth and, of course, my required northern-tier sentence at Minot, ND. Thanks for this video, I was never a part of a MITO. I do remember three things from CCTS at Castle: 1) my instructor told me, with a choice between the attache-sized bag or the huge bag, take the small one because either way you're going to fill it up so make it easy on your back; 2) in one of the restroom stalls there was a Kilroy-type cartoon that said, "Be Alert! The Air Force needs more LERTS"; 3) first day the instructor was orienting us and soberly said, "Look, I know you probably don't want to be here in SAC. Yeah, I can tell you from experience that SAC sucks. But ... a suck for SAC is a blow for democracy." My first Atlantic crossing was in '78, during the day, DR's all the way to the Azores shooting sun lines every 20 minutes, pre-INS (even pre-palletized INS). When we got there and the co-pilot got a VOR/DME fix, we were 7 miles from my DR position.
Thanks for sharing, Steve! Looking back now, we did some amazing things using some pretty rudimentary procedures with old equipment all being performed by very young crews. By the time I started flying 135's we did have the INS. Our saying was: "Follow the INS and go wrong with confidence!".
Toward the end of my flying career, the INS units were very worn and tired. For overland flying, a Tacan-mixed DNS was more dependable than the INS because the INS was programmed to not believe too much of any updates based on how long it had been in NAV mode. So, for example, if it was 7 miles off after 2 hours, it would not accept that it could actually be that far off in just two hours - so it would only "correct" a mile or three. The DNS was like a puppy dog - it believed every update you gave it. Of course, that was a double-edged sword. Many a DNS landed in a different country than the rest of the airplane. Hah!
@@TomScottMorgan30 As a tanker nav in the early 1970s---what's an INS?---- I once tried Pressure Pattern on a fighter drag to Guam, just to see if it would give me a usable LOP. Well, lo and behold, it did!
Then I tried to explain to my copilot how comparing the difference between pressure altitude and absolute (radar) altitude from two DRs over a time period of steady cruise would permit assuming a drift offset, because of cyclonic winds around low-pressure centers. Ha!
In the 920th ARS, the navs would hand out bananas to the copilots. It was known that copilots would invariably hold bananas in their right hands. After that, all you had to do was say, "Turn 30 degrees banana."
Ironically, it was SAC's willingness and ability to fight that kept the peace.
SAC Motto: "Peace is our Profession".
The idea was to be so capable and so competent that nobody could imagine attacking us without suffering devasting losses. It worked.
Our motto was "Peace is our Profession".
I flew B-52's. I believe I was in one MITO. Before that I flew a C-47 in Vietnam out of Saigon. THERE the tower would hold us from takeoff, after the takeoff of a B747 or a C-5A because the wing turbulence off one of those big aircraft would flip us over 180 degress. One can appreciate the dangers of wake turbulence in a MITO, when attempting to follow 8 or 9 big aircraft, like the B-52 or even the KC-135, after a MITO takeoff...especially with all the smoke to confuse the issue. Also a warm outside air temperature would be exacerbated by all that engine heat in a MITO takeoff. Takeoff roll distance was greatly extended by the temperature of the air flowing into the engines. ANOTHER factor to worrry about.
Awesome video Tom! I just finished a joint project for the USAF and Navy a few months back involving the T-1A Jayhawk, which is the primary training platform for students that will be entering either airlift or tanker operations. My role was to conduct functional check flights prior to and after the installation of the Navy’s new (CSO) Combat System Operator hardware/software training package. The flying was great and presented some unique and challenging situations.
John
I don't care what anyone says, the 135 is a beautiful aircraft
Agreed! And whenever I see one flying by, I still stop and watch. It looks good from every angle. 😍
Always an Awesome site, loved these launches! I was around for the first GS exercises( 22nd BMW, MAFB, CA.) 🇺🇸
I passed through March AFB several times in my flying days. Being a flat-lands and southeastern US native, I found the surrounding mountains rather intimidating - particularly while flying KC-135A's that could struggle with trying to achieve a 2,000' per minute rate of climb when heavy. (...I did not enjoy looking UP at the ground!) It was beautiful terrain otherwise. ;-)
@@TomScottMorgan30 I never really was intimidated by the " hills" around the " Moreno Valley" ( Riverside county), much however I grew up and flew in Alaska, I do have great memories of those last great years of SAC!!🇺🇲
Damm I miss crewing the KC 135 in Altus OK, I knew I was making life time memories. Now retired we were real SAC any time anywhere!
Brian Talbott when were you at Altus I was IFR maintenance 75-78 on KC135.
@@heribertawells9297 I was stationed there from 1985 -1990
Griffis.. Now thats one big base. Im from buffalo and when i was little my father was in the 914th NF. We did alot of camping in the Adirondacks and would always stop by the commissary and Bx for a weeks worth of provisions for the trip. Great vid ty
Tom, I was also a crew member on a 135 but it was in the mid 70's. Looking at this video really nothing changed from then, loud and smoky... lol. Stationed at Plattsburgh where we had FB-111's so our mito takeoffs were not so bad with wake turbulence. I had two experiences with mito takeoffs with B-52's and your right, lots of turbulence but being 5th in a 5 tanker mito was no picnic..
Looking for guys who see this video who were in the 380 ARS or 310 ARS. Like to get in contact with some of you guys.
I was a boomer in the 70's and can attest to the unpleasantness of the ride if you in the back of the pack. But it was pure exhilaration and I wouldn't have traded my job for anything.
...Ah yes! The exhilaration of feeling the plane roll violently to the right while the pilot has the yoke twisted full left... and yet that right roll continues! You yell "bank angle" across the cockpit as your loaded tanker swings past 30 degrees - but your call is pointless as ALL the left alerion in your world is already dialed in. So you just sit there and watch as the pilots grimace, and you pray. Somewhere near 40 degrees of bank your deep swing stops, and slowly ... too slowly ... the heavy beast begins to respond to all the "lefty" control inputs ...and the right wing begins to rise! But, this is no time to let out a "sigh of relief" as you dutifully call out "..110 seconds water!" (...meaning that in about ten seconds, your water augmentation will be done, and you are about to loose 4,400 lbs of thrust, whether you like it or not.) And on cue, the water runs out - just as promised. The pilot pushes the nose down to maintain a sustainable airspeed. You are only 600' feet AGL ...no wait, 575' ...no 550'...CRAP.. But, somehow, at around 500' AGL, the airspeed has climbed back up to 180 knots, and slowly ...too slowly .. you actually climb. You watch the trees seemingly fly by the co-pilots head for what seems an eternity as your heavily loaded tanker struggles upward. You hear your lead pilot advise ATC that this flight of four will be unable to maintain a standard 2,500' per minute rate of climb. Meanwhile, using your ancient radar, you coax your pilot to slide further right so your plane can get above the tankers ahead of you while staying out of their wake turbulence. For the first time since rotation, you look down and see that half your nav gear has slid and/or bounced off the nav table in front you of you. Seeing your plight, the boom operator unstraps and gathers up both your plotter and dividers which managed to land on the sextant stool in front of the electrical cabinet. Yup, it's going to be one of those days..... ;-)
@@TomScottMorgan30 Yep that about describes it. Not to mention the receivers who's goal is to kill the boom operator. Yet, I still managed to enjoy my job.
Thank you for your service. I was an AF Fuels Specialist but medically could not become a boomer. I was still proud to wear the uniform and support our country, if on the ground. :)
@@TomScottMorgan30 thanks for that. I noticed what you described in the clip. I didn't know about the water, interesting. As a kid in the 70's living on Vancouver island under the flight path 4-6 in formation would fly north in morning and a southern pack later in the day. Other planes just a spot in the sky but the 52, you could see features it's so big.
@@TomScottMorgan30 Those we’re the good days of flying. SAC kept us on our toes ensuring that we would get where we needed to be to keep this country safe. I enjoyed my career as a Boom Operator, and my kinship with my Navigators. Thanks for your service. Boom Operator forever. Dreamweaver, retired 1995.
This brings back memories of ORIs at BEALE .Thanks for the video.🇺🇸
I grew up 7 mile from the end of the runway at Griffis AFB in NY. Plus I was stationed there as a jet engine tech for the 416 bomb wing. Saw this procedure on many occasions. There’s nothing like having them fly over the house at 2000 feet at 0200 hours at full power!
Thank you very much for posting this.
I grew up outside of Carswell AFB in Ft. Worth.
I attended school outside the base In Second grade. Those big B52s would fly out of Carswell right over our campus about 1 mile from the end of the runways, like that often. Instruction would stop. The ground and building would shake. Then it was over. We went back to Math or reading. Wild times. ⚡️💪🏽Peace, the old fashioned way⚡️💪🏽
I can’t count the times I sat on stand-by during MITOs back in the 80’s. Whether it was in a P-2, on the P-15, or the P-10 rescue truck, this brings back memories. The only thing missing is the JP-4 exhaust fumes.
Firefighter, Wurtsmith AFB, 81-83, Castle 85-93.
That’s some serious stuff. We did them in Minot in the 80’s.
Wow. While stationed at Randolph from 87-92 went to yearly conferences at the nearby Rome Air Development Center. Used to see some bombers and tankers, which wasn't something an officer in my career field saw often.
After all the info I've read, or crash investigation videos about wake turbulence crashes I've seen, watching this makes me a bit uneasy to see. But since there were no adverse effects from these minimal separations on t/o I guess it all worked out! It was a powerful scene to watch, I must say! Incredible!
Man it would’ve been powerful to watch this live.
For those asking what happens if any of them have to abort, I asked a former Buff pilot that once. He said they would focus on the speed brakes of the a/c in front of them. If those deployed, it meant an abort so you would also immediately abort, and anyone behind you would do the same. Since the lead a/c would be going faster, everyone could abort safely if they did it right away. He wasn’t ever aware of it happening IRL. I imagine with eight engines it would a very serious problem before they’d have to reject a takeoff.
@ND5280 B-52's do not have ailerons. So, they use spoilers (speed brakes) to level the wings - or turn. It would not be unusual to see a B-52 taking off with the spoilers being alternatingly deployed - especially when in the wake turbulence of aircraft ahead of them. Add the smoke and steam left over the runway if winds are light or right down the runway, and the ability to see, recognize, comprehend, and react to seeing the spoilers UP on an aircraft ahead may be a problem. For sure, you would react to whatever you saw and became aware of. But the most likely way to learn of an abort was via a radio call. The aircraft aborting would call out that they were aborting and their speed. If you were above their speed, you continued. If you were below their speed, you aborted too.
I do not know what the rules were before 1983, but for my time in SAC, I never recall doing MITO's at night. If it was dark, we did a cell departure with 45 second(ish) spacing. At night, you would never see the speed brakes or spoilers of an aircraft ahead of you. So, radio calls were the most likely way. Also, there was a Supervisor Of Flying (SOF), as well as (usually) the Director of Operations (DO) as well as sometimes even the Wing Commander out on the airfield as well. If any of them noticed any incidents (accident, abort, emergency, anomaly, etc.), they would call it out.
Of course, this is for exercises like we see in the subject video. If it was a real world response or (more likely) an "Inadvertent Klaxon" (ooops!), then the crews had no "adult supervision" and would do their best to see and avoid - with radio calls being the primary means of keeping planes apart.
I experienced several "moving" exercises at night where we would roll out of the alert facility and onto the runway and briefly set take-off power and then roll to the end and exit. I never took off.
In fact, I never took off at maximum gross weight EVER. But, I did watch a KC-135 take off out of Robin's AFB GA at 322,500 lbs (max weight), so I was comfortable that we could do it.
I would be playing in the back yard in Austin, Texas when the Wing would come back to Bergstrom. We were dead center on the approach and the 52s would come right over the top of us. I remember my dad would come out and watch with me because we only had one TV channel KTBC #7 and there was no watching when this happened because every bomber going over would interfere with the signal. Col. Harry Lester was our neighbor and he was an aircraft commander and had the red phone on the 100' cord he would take with him in the back yard. I ended up spending 50+ years in the cockpit and in no small part to him and growing up there.
To paraphrase a somewhat famous movie character: "Now THAT'S how we did it in the '80's, son!".
was a crew chief on a 135 back in 77. I was their the day Aircraft 522 (a kc-135-a) caught fire and burned to the ground. lots of memories
Thank you Tom.
😊
Superb ❤
If only airlines could learn this one neat trick.
Grew up in Merced (Castle AFB) in the 70s. They would do alerts sometimes and flew right over the high school. Teachers would just give up trying to talk.😂
Soooo, I"m guessing a rejected take off is out of the question! Those MITO departures are impressive as hell for sure.
Actually, there were procedures established to handle that. The aircraft aborting would call out on the radio their abort, and which side of the runway they were moving toward (pick one!). If you were ahead of the aborting aircraft, you continued. If you were behind the aborter, you executed a sympathetic abort (you aborted too) until you either heard the aborting aircraft call clear of the runway - or could see you were clear. (...not easy as the runway enviornment was often covered with smoke and steam) There was also a SOF (Supervisor Of Flying) in a radio equipped car on the airfield to assist with keeping the crews aware of the situation and to call out for specific actions based on their perspective. The KC-135A models were "committed to flight" surprisingly early in their take-off roll at high gross weights,. By the time you hit around 120ish knots or so, you were not going to stop on the runway no matter what. Rotate speed for a fully loaded KC-135A on an average 72°F day near sea level was about 169 knots with flaps 30. Once you passed about 120 knots but were below 169 knots, anything that went "serious wrong" was likely gonna kill you. But of course, the thermals from your fireball would possibly help the guys following you get a little more seperation from the ground. So there was that.😆
B-52s are insane. They don't rotate at V2, they levitate
Very impressive. Presumably each aircraft is starting its take-off before the preceding one has lifted off the runway.
Typically three on the runway - one near rotation speed, one about 3,000 feet behind passing 100 knots, and one lining up on centerline setting takeoff thrust - doing about 20 knots. Everybody else rolling behind at around 10-15 knots trying to optimize spacing.
A good trick for getting the best spacing was to look at the aircraft ahead and adjust your distance so that the imagined axle of their nose gear appeared to align with their aft fuselage. If you held that and followed their track, you would be pretty close to the target spacing of 12 seconds (typically).
Been there. Done that. Assholes and elbows back in the pack.
Wow!!! If you lived a short distance away, and didn't know that this was a practice scramble, that would have been scary. :) Duck n cover time. ;D
Leave it up! I've got some pilot friends who would love to see this.
21 Yr Veteran - I'm not to proud to admit this gave me a stiffie! I hated rolling down the runway hoping my tanker didn't have water cutout!
Yeah. That was not good. At least by the time I flew "A" models, the water injection system had been redesigned to give you a fighting chance. The original system was split left and right. So, if it failed you could loose all injection on one side. After a few spectacular accidents, they changed it to an inboard and outboard design. If we lost part of it the remaining system would be symmetrical. Our joke was that at least we would get to choose what we hit as we went down!
I soent many many days on thr observation point, as a kid. We'd ride our bikes around Perimeter rd and hang out to watch aircraft do touch n go's. Now its blocked off, and the road up to the point is overgrown.
I did 2 years there at the Griff. 1987-1989. SPS. I loved watching a KLAXON. We had a few “generations” when I was there. Never fun for a new Airman. Guarding Wonder Woman’s plane for 12 hours. Glad I did it! 🇺🇸🫡
Everyone's gangsta until the 8 engine aircraft wings start forming condensation
I wonder how much less fuel the new RR engines will use. Will they cause the range to be much more? just curious. B-52 is an amazing beast, glad they are on my side.
@hisaddle I have seen no published estimates yet. I imagine we will hear nothing until they get into flight test. However, based on the cost of the program, I think we can expect a double digit reduction in fuel consumption, a corresponding increase in range, and a great reduction in maintenance hours required while providing (perhaps) even a modest increase in thrust. This should also reduce dependency on tankers for air refueling on some missions. The engines should also be slightly quieter, which surrounding communities may appreciate. Overall, it should all be a positive as long as cost overruns are successfully avoided.
15seconds! Check! 16 seconds! Check! 14 seconds!Check! Bill's a heavy drinker!
Tom Scott, did you know a Tanker navigator named David Kelly? He was us there in NY about this same time, 1985 or so. He was a friend of mine who washed out of pilot training and went back to his old job as Navigator.
I did not know David Kelly - but we may have crossed paths. There were about 3,000 KC-135 Navigators in a typical fiscal year, and it was amazing how small and familiar we were. I did not move around as much as many. I enjoyed the southern (less cold) places and tended to "homestead" there. For example, I spent eight years at Warner Robins AFB GA, and six years at MacDill AFB FL - that's 14 years of my 20 year career in the warm toasty south. 😊
But, there was lots of TDY, training, confrences, bomb comps, PME, and countless other opportunities to meet fellow Navs. I may have met David somwhere along the way, but I don't recall. (Another side affect of aging!) 😊
@@TomScottMorgan30 Thanks for the reply Tom. Oh by the way, what do Navigators do after 20 years in the USAF? Several of my friends were USAF pilots and went to the airlines after the USAF. Just curious.
I was 42 years old when I "retired" from the USAF. So, I moved to where I wanted to live and got a few other non-flying jobs (in my case with local government) and worked until age 59 - and retired for "real'. Now, I go sailing a few days each week and keep up with house, car, boat, and yard maintenance on those days my wife and/or I am not having doctors maintain us!😨 Anyway, there is no more flying -
and I am fine with that. Flying reqires a level of skill and proficiency that would be difficult to maintain at this point in my life. Military flying was very demanding and the scheduling of it was very taxing - it was definitely a young persons job because there is not much sleep, crazy hours, and constant training between deployments. Sailing requires a bit of the same skill and proficiency attributes, but if I screw up and spin out of control in my sailboat, I might be going ...7 knots? (..Much better than "losing it" at 500 knots! 😆) I'm glad I was able to be a navigator as a young man, but I'm also glad that I don't have to do that job anymore. It was very demanding work and mistakes could be disasterous - there was lots of pressure to perform perfectly every time. (One bad day flying could kill you.) I miss it sometimes - but not too much. 😊
@@TomScottMorgan30 I was in SAC when I was in the USAF 1971-75. I was a crew member on a Titan II ICBM. Spent many alerts down in the silos. I was also on an Instructor crew and that took lots of extra time and work. I stayed in only 4 years. I planned on staying in at least 20 but my wife left me for a KC-135 pilot. What a bummer. Thanks Tom
Rob, I actually wanted to be a missle launch officer. However, I applied for an ROTC scholarship, and they said - in order to get it - I would have to be a navigator.
I did not want to make the USAF a career. I figured I would go into missles, get a masters degree while on alert, and leave for a civilian life. But, taking the ROTC scholarship with a "Nav Slot" meant I owed the USAF six years - not four. Other commitments for PME, upgrades, PCS's, plus the Desert Storm "stop loss" left me with ten years in before I could leave.
Since those first ten years went by so fast, I eventually decided to stay in and try to survive for 20 years. I was fine with the service, and enjoyed much of it, but it was very hard on my family, and not exactly what I planned, but it worked out ok. I retired the first day I could - 20 years, 2 days, 4 hours and 16 minutes! 😆
Looking back, my years in the USAF were some of the most satisfying of my life. I enjoyed the incredible amount of responsibility I was given at such a young age, and the amount of judgement and leeway I was given to "make things happen" as I rose through the ranks.
If I had to do it all over again, I would - but I'm not sure my family would approve. 😊
My dad worked there in base operations for years
Now that is impressive.
I thought the demonstration of the low pressure zone above the wings providing lift and condensing the water vapor was very cool.
I agree. You could tell it was a bit bumpy with the aircraft moving up and down fast enough as well to help create that vapor effect
What kind of Model are those B-52s ?!
They seem like the OG B-52s Without the High-pitch Howl but with just Pure Roar !?
I used to watch this on the regular from the roof of my parents' house near KMHR (former Mather AFB-SAC/ATC) Then, the 320th bomb wing and 940th ARG would do a MITO practice alert once a month. SO cool, yet scary thinking what they were capable of. On another note, the aircraft, say past #3 had to be flying thru the most ungodly wake turbulence. I'm wondering how many on board needed dental work after a ride like that.
#USAF #B52 #KC135 #SAC
Dental work was seldom necessary. However, nearly everyone needed to wash their flightsuits when they got back.
Especially for GRETA! 😁😁😁
Awesome! ✈️👍
The Griff!
Does anyone know if the KCs were supposed to refuel the 52s on the way to their target? I don't understand why they're taking off together. I thought the BUFFs were designed to fly straight there.
The reason they are taking off together is to survive. The exercise is practicing a scenario in which they are responding to a nuclear attack that is inbound to the United States.
In many cases, the bombers would be refueled by co-located tankers. But there were also tankers coming from bases that had no bombers to join in support of these bombers.
Yes, in many instances, some B-52's had enough fuel to get to the points from which they could launch their weapons without meeting a tanker. But it was the tankers' fuel that would give them time to loiter so that their weapons' arrival at the target could be "better choreographed."
Tankers also gave them the fuel necessary to find a surviving base to recover to.
Tankers would also be a key resource in helping reconstitute the surviving forces for follow-on strikes after the initial exchange.
Overall, air refueling tankers increased the flexibility of the airborne arm of the "Triad" of nuclear forces. Once an ICBM or SLBM is launched, there is no ability to alter or recall that missile. But, manned bombers - mated with tankers - allowed for greater flexibility ...and even the ability to recall forces after launch if warranted.
The tankers launched with the bombers simply to try and survive the first exchanges and increase the time available for the surviving authorities to manage the chaos. Hope this clarifies!
I was at KI Sawyer from 82-86. B-52's could carry so much fuel that they were incapable of taking off if they were full. They were loaded so that they could quickly get to altitude to take all the fuel that the KC-135 was carrying. The KC-135's were to give the B-52 every last drop they had insomuch as they couldn't return to the base. The KC-135's had a pre-planned ditch point on the Canadian side of Lake Superior. In the 80's, a B-52's chances of returning from a mission was 30:1. Realistically, the KC-135 pilots had a single job that lasted about 30 minutes......take off....refuel the buff.....ditch the plane.....and they were done.
@@tigertrap2269 Again, this is folklore.
@@TomScottMorgan30 .....again....you're full of shit.....I was there.
The 416th Bomb Wing!!!
which model B52? G or H, or is this a dumb question?
@@keithad6485 The only dumb questions are the ones unasked!
They all look like G models to me - but someone who knows Buff's better may say different.
WOW!!! Just WOW!!!
I'm sure mom will love seeing it.
Sail on and sail safe!
Mike
Is that Barksdale Air Force Base
@@WarrenBrownJr No. It's Griffiss AFB.
the wake disturbances were disturbing the wake disturbances
Are they capable of doing the same drill today with this many aircraft. Very impressive. Had this been a real event event those camera people would have been vaporized shortly after take off
No.
Today's crews no longer train to this level - Strategic Air Command (SAC) is gone.
Additionally, the "upgraded" navigational systems aircrews depend upon today (..in lieu of a Navigator) require substantially functioning electrical components and systems that will likely be inoperative after the first Electro Magnetic Pulse (EMP) of any nearby nuclear weapon detonation.
SAC Navigators had the ability to use dead reckoning (DR) and celestial navigation (CEL) techniques to roughly accomplish the mission with little more than a compass, clock, sextant, paper charts, and almanac tables.
Today, KC-135's are flown (mostly) without navigators. If today's tanker crews had no electronics or functioning navigation systems, their mission effectiveness rate under nuclear attack would likely be near zero.
I do not know if today's bomber crews are trained in more traditional navigational techniques. But even if they are, I am certain their proficiency is nothing near what SAC crews had in "the day". Times have changed and so have plans for preparing for war. The bombers can now carry weapons that allow them to launch from a far greater distance away from their targets than SAC had. (....So, the number of tanker's needed may be greatly reduced as a result.) And, the ability to reliably launch the "Air Arm" of the Triad while under attack may now simply be too expensive to maintain. They now do what they can with what they've got.
Once the KC-135's are finally "replaced" by the new KC-46, the same quick-response capability you see here (..where crews run out to a "cocked-on" aircraft and launch in minutes) will be lost, too. So, there is no going back. The new systems coming on line are not truly "quick launch under attack" capable like SAC tried to be. The new systems seem to assume WE will control the time and conditions of their use - not an attacker.
We can just hope that all the judgements being made are sound ones. Based on my prior knowledge of how these types of decisions are actually made, I believe they are. (...But, I admit I could be wrong.) As always, time will tell!
I didn’t know they had dead reckoning and celestial navigation incase the electronics went out. Thanks for the info. Also: how would you look at the stars in a kc135? Would you need to go into the cockpit and look up through one of the pilots upwards facing windows?
@internetrules8522 We had a periscopic sextant and two windows either side of it on top of the aircraft and just behind the Navigator seat.
The windows were later removed after a couple of accidents in which they failed at altitude killing a boom operator who was taking a cell shot for the navigator.
@internetrules8522 Also, we didn't just have dead reckoning and celestial in case the electronics went out. We also had it because that was the best way for us to navigate considering we had few electronics. So, we operated that way all the time. DR was the primary means of navigation, and radar was the primary means of obtaining fixes over or near land. Over water or the poles (ice), celestial replaced radar.
Today's 135's fly without navigators except in very rare circumstances or special missions. GPS provides position accuracy within yards. Celestial could get us within miles. ;-)
There is just something about these old grainy videos 😂 oldskool
And just about the time one thought it couldn't get ANY LOUDER-they'd turn the damn water on. Spent a few months at Kadena AB in the very early 80's-nothing but A mod 135's then. Those beasts were honest to God noisier than a SR-71 taking off. They would always launch 2 135's-then Habu would make it's appearance & head out for parts unknown.
@@stevenrobinson2381 The water only lasted 2 minutes. Then, the noise returned to merely unbearable. 😆
With that many aircraft taking off that base must have had an ORI in progress and these crews was coming from the alert pad on those birds.
Hi Sidney - this was part of the (then) annual Global Shield Exercise. The actual "alert" aircraft were pulled off alert, de-armed and de-fueled, and then every flyable aircraft on the base (with a crew available) was generated and placed on exercise alert. The aircraft actually used "peace time" requirements in terms of take-off weight and engine out data, and none were close to their EWO ( Emergency War Order) limits - other than the timing between aircraft was the same as in an actual alert launch. With SAC gone, I don't believe this capability is practiced anymore ...so this is truly a piece of history.
@@TomScottMorgan30 That is nice to know and miss those days in SAC so much and the work we did.
@@TomScottMorgan30 Yeah, and they always seemed to kick off those no-notice exercises on a Friday afternoon. A klaxon about lunchtime on Friday? That's the sweet sound of everyone losing their days off. You know those plans you had for this weekend? Wah wah wahhhhh.... (sad tormbones) Good old SAC. It was a great experience and I wouldn't mind being that young again but I don't know if I'd want to re-live those days all over. Lots of pressure and responsibility on some very young people.
I loved having that pressure and responsibility.
It was also pretty funny sometimes - like on my first TDY to Hawaii with a 24 year old Aircraft Commander, a 24 year old Copilot, and me as a 23 year old Navigator,along with a 20 year old boom operator. After landing our multi-million dollar KC-135A tanker in Hawaii (..also carrying 44 passengers in the back), none of us on the crew could rent a car to see the island. ...You had to be 25 to rent a car!
I remember in the early 80s going out to Hickam as a cadet and renting a beater from an NCO. Lots of good times!
Minute 3.40, Johnny its my friend B-52 pilot..now Johnny retired & live at somban nismilan
Awesome
I bet the air smelled pretty thick and heavy of carbohydrants at teh spot where the camera filmed
No doubt.
Man O'Hara is really busy today
My question is, how can they see... following the closeness of each aircraft...the heavy smoke builds up....they must have instruments that they go by in this almost zero visibility.
Safe separation was created and maintained by:
1) The initial spacing - 12 seconds was the target for "like" aircraft.
2) The use of "fan headings" in which each follow-on aircraft turned 10 degrees further to one side than the aircraft ahead.
3) The use of the APN-59 radar (operated by a navigator) who could provide a heading to avoid a conflict.
In large cell departures, it was not uncommon for crews flying several spots back from the lead aircraft to not see the aircraft ahead of them until they were able to climb above them.
The trailing aircraft typically stacked up above the lead aircraft 500' or so. This altitude separation was an additional means of avoiding a collision, and it also made it possible for the navigators to use the radar to track the planes ahead by tilting the antenna downward slightly.
There was no such thing as TCAS, no GPS, and no other means to effectively maintain position. We could use Air-to-Air TACAN to determine distance from another aircraft, but this was very much a crude "analog"system. Once you were inside a mile, it couldn't really display a distance that would be useable to guarantee separation.
Bottom line: The procedures reduced the likelihood of a collision. If "blind" due to smoke, clouds, weather, or darkness, maintaining separation became the primary job of the navigator using a primitive radar.
Imagine watching this at 2x speed!
You'll find that feature with the tool button in the upper right corner.
Could this exercise be repeated today?
No. The bombers could be pretty close, but the tankers not so much. They could certainly do a "scramble exercise" that would look similiar - but the totality of this "exercise" was demonstration of a capability that is lost today.
The "problem" is today's reliance on electronics for navigation. In a nuclear war scenario, that is a huge problem because things like GPS, INS, navaids on the ground... everything external and electronic used to navigate the aircraft is GONE once nukes (EMP) start popping off. That is why these planes you see here had navigators on board. The Navs were real anachronisms in the day. They could use dead reckoning, celestial navigation, paper charts, dividers, plotters, and a watch to position the aircraft and direct it to where it needed to be. There are few (if any) classically capable navigators flying today. Those skills have been lost to time. I doubt there is anybody left who could teach such skills.
So, while we could scramble planes to try and survive a nuclear attack, our ability to actually use those planes as effective weapons in a nuclear environment is suspect. It would depend on how resistant the wiring and systems of these 60-70 year old planes prove to be against an electromagnetic pulse created by a nuclear detonation. Back when I flew them, our expectation was that all but the most basic systems would fail or degrade. That is why we used to fly navigation legs without INS/DNS, radar, or radio beacons. Just an airspeed meter, doppler, compass, watch, sextant, tables, almanac, charts, and flight log sheet ...and pencils and erasers. Lots of erasers. Nearly everything could fail, and we could still get close. I doubt crews today could function with systems as degraded or rudimentary as we used.
So, I say "no". We can not do this same thing today. There is nobody on board today who can navigate when all the glass screens are blank.
Damn that’s a lot of smoke in the air
@robertclay1150 1950's technology at its finest! 😊
YES! YES!
Caution, wake turbulence.
Hi Tom,
I noticed from your previous video post of Cold Play, you stated that would be starting a new job (good for you). I’m curious, are you still in the industry (aviation), or did you leave the field when you separated from the Air Force? Anyway, I hope your new career doesn’t keep you away from entertaining us with your sailing adventures!! Hope I’m not being to nosey- John
I guess this is before the advent of image stabilization and tripods because it hurts my eyes.
Yes. This was also before there was an internet ...or even cell phones for the "common man".
Fun Fact KC crew was expected to dump every last drop of fuel into the bombers then bail out and hope for the best in the Arctic or ocean. Yikes. I was in CAP and spent a summer week at Pease. I can tell you the food there would have made it worth it. Well, compared to my Mom's alleged cooking.
@billwendell6886 That is mostly folklore. Missions were planned to allow the tankers to have enough fuel to recover at their planned base. However, because of the nature of this particular mission, the bombers could request all the tanker fuel available. Again, this was not planned to happen, but there were procedures in place to allow for it. The tankers were allowed to keep enough fuel to maneuver clear of the refueling track and flame out. Then, you could glide for as long as you could toward shore, or a picket ship, or an island, or whatever you could find.
I was at KI Sawyer from 82-86. Our KC-135 pilots had a ditch point in Canada on the north side of Lake Superior. The odds of the B-52 returning from a mission was 30:1.....so there was no need for the tanker to return to the base. They'd give the B-52 everything they had.
All that JP8 flying coal!
@orbitingeyes2540 Close!
Back in the 1980's, we used JP4. 😁
This is what the beginning of WWIII would look like.
My Father Serve U.S.AIR FORCE Vietnam 🇻🇳 81th Fligher Wing Brentwaters England 🇬🇧Work on Both B-52 Bomber and KC-135 Tranker