RAN Fleet Air Arm Question

SsgtC

Banned
I've been doing some reading about the FAA for the Royal Australian Navy, and one thing I cannot seem to find anywhere, is what did the FAA use for carrier qualifications for their new Aviators? In the USN, they used Buckeyes for intermediate flight training and qualifying new Aviators and RIOs in carrier ops. But what did the RAN use? The Sea Vampire?
 
I've been doing some reading about the FAA for the Royal Australian Navy, and one thing I cannot seem to find anywhere, is what did the FAA use for carrier qualifications for their new Aviators? In the USN, they used Buckeyes for intermediate flight training and qualifying new Aviators and RIOs in carrier ops. But what did the RAN use? The Sea Vampire?

The phrase "she'll be right mate!"
 
In all seriousness, RAN fighter pilots landed on the Melbourne for their first time as a solo pilot, the training Skyhawks were never taken on board and IIUC the Sea Venoms the Radar Operator couldn't fly the plane. Gannet and Tracker pilots landed on board their first time with a qualified pilot.
 
So they qualified in the same aircraft they'd be flying operationally?:eek:

Yes, but as we've discussed before, RAN pilots weren't the pussies USN pilots were; they didn't refuse to fly from the tiny and slow Melbourne like USN did. Only the USMC pilots had the balls to fly off the Melbourne, there he is, 2nd from the right in the odd uniform.

images
 
Last edited:

SsgtC

Banned
In all seriousness, RAN fighter pilots landed on the Melbourne for their first time as a solo pilot, the training Skyhawks were never taken on board and IIUC the Sea Venoms the Radar Operator couldn't fly the plane. Gannet and Tracker pilots landed on board their first time with a qualified pilot.
Man, I knew the FAA pulled some stunts, but damn. Lol.
 
I've been doing some reading about the FAA for the Royal Australian Navy, and one thing I cannot seem to find anywhere, is what did the FAA use for carrier qualifications for their new Aviators? In the USN, they used Buckeyes for intermediate flight training and qualifying new Aviators and RIOs in carrier ops. But what did the RAN use? The Sea Vampire?

Riain has already answered the question, thus ninjaing my response.

Were you thinking about writing a TL, as IMHO our FAA receives far too little attention on the board. Hell, I included the RAN FAA into my Cambodian saga, purely so that they could get a run somewhere.

There was a really good alternative history book set in the 1960s that was written about RAAF / RAN aces, @Riain can you remember the book I'm thinking about?
 
Riain has already answered the question, thus ninjaing my response.

Were you thinking about writing a TL, as IMHO our FAA receives far too little attention on the board. Hell, I included the RAN FAA into my Cambodian saga, purely so that they could get a run somewhere.

There was a really good alternative history book set in the 1960s that was written about RAAF / RAN aces, @Riain can you remember the book I'm thinking about?

Never heard of such a book.

I half-arsed a TL once where the Melbourne flew operational sorties to cover Operation Hardihood in April 1966 and a full war cruise off Vietnam in 1967.
 
I know a lot of partner nation carrier pilots have trained at Pensacola over the years. Are you sure the Australians didn't do that?
 
This is where we mention that the FAA lost half of the A-4s they had in service? Without being shot at at any stage (while in FAA service, some were ex-USN).
http://www.adf-serials.com.au/n13.htm

Sure, 8 is the same number of F4Ks the RN lost in a similar period in similar circumstances and the Crusader mishap rate was some 56%. Carrier flying in the 60s and 7os was a particularly perilous business.

I know a lot of partner nation carrier pilots have trained at Pensacola over the years. Are you sure the Australians didn't do that?

Some may have but the RAN had its own full training syllabus, including Macchi advanced jet trainers, so training at Pensacola would be generally an exception or in addition to RAN training. After all we wouldn't the USN to teach our pilots that the Melbourne was too slow and small to land on. :)

CAC_CA22_Winjeel_R12147356.jpg


Macchi%20Air%20Trainers%20fly%20over%20Nowra.jpg
 

SsgtC

Banned
Riain has already answered the question, thus ninjaing my response.

Were you thinking about writing a TL, as IMHO our FAA receives far too little attention on the board. Hell, I included the RAN FAA into my Cambodian saga, purely so that they could get a run somewhere.

There was a really good alternative history book set in the 1960s that was written about RAAF / RAN aces, @Riain can you remember the book I'm thinking about?
I am, actually. It won't be focusing exclusively on them, but they will be a part of it. Just don't expect it anytime soon. The more I research, the more details in finding that I need to compensate for or account for. Even the small changes. Lol
 

SsgtC

Banned
Some may have but the RAN had its own full training syllabus, including Macchi advanced jet trainers, so training at Pensacola would be generally an exception or in addition to RAN training. After all we wouldn't the USN to teach our pilots that the Melbourne was too slow and small to land on. :)
And this is why I was asking. Lol. I saw that they had a training squadron for operational training on the Sea Venom (725 Squadron), but they're isn't much information about their primary or intermediate flight training
 
And this is why I was asking. Lol. I saw that they had a training squadron for operational training on the Sea Venom (725 Squadron), but they're isn't much information about their primary or intermediate flight training

724 and 725 sqns were operation training sqns, to convert them to the type and land based combat training. There also was a practice deck marked out at Nowra, where I imagine pilots would practice approaches and touch-and-goes and maybe even use the MLS and catch the wires that are laid out at RAAF/RAN airfields.

But when the time came for their first carrier landing, fighter pilots were on their own.
 
I am, actually. It won't be focusing exclusively on them, but they will be a part of it. Just don't expect it anytime soon. The more I research, the more details in finding that I need to compensate for or account for. Even the small changes. Lol

When you get further along into your writing, please let me know as I can recommend a few online resources for you to look at, that will provide further insight into the FAA fixed wing operations.
 

SsgtC

Banned
When you get further along into your writing, please let me know as I can recommend a few online resources for you to look at, that will provide further insight into the FAA fixed wing operations.
Awesome!! If you want to shoot me a PM or post them here, I'd really appreciate it. I'm laying out all the major plot points right now while I'm researching, then backfilling detail as I go.
 

Nick P

Donor
There was a really good alternative history book set in the 1960s that was written about RAAF / RAN aces, @Riain can you remember the book I'm thinking about?

Are you thinking of John Baxter's Alternative RAAF and RAN Fleet Air Arm?
More about alternate aircraft and carrier choices than pilots though.
 
The reason I asked about the training in Pensacola is because I read an interview with the commander of the French Navy in Defense News a few years ago and he said that French pilots do all of their training in the US and the first time a French pilot traps on a carrier it is in a USN trainer on a USN flight deck.
 
Top