RAN Fleet Air Arm Question

and HMAS Melbourne is the only carrier to have sunk 2 destroyers, from its own side, in peacetime...

And both times it was the fault of the destroyer captain, the USN captain being specifically told about the Daring disaster.

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.

I don't doubt it, but in the RAN case we're talking about pre 1981 and things were different then. Indeed up to 1971 there was a RN carrier in the area and the RAN operated far more closely with them than the USN at the time.
 

SsgtC

Banned
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.
Pensacola is a bit far for primary flight training. Especially when the Australians traditionally operated their own primary flight training and operational conversion units.

I don't doubt it, but in the RAN case we're talking about pre 1981 and things were different then. Indeed up to 1971 there was a RN carrier in the area and the RAN operated far more closely with them than the USN at the time.
My thinking was, that the RAN could purchase a handful (12-16) of T-2 Buckeyes for intermediate flight training and carrier qualifications. It's a cheap, carrier capable jet trainer that could probably (still need to research it) operate from RN decks as well as American.
 
My thinking was, that the RAN could purchase a handful (12-16) of T-2 Buckeyes for intermediate flight training and carrier qualifications. It's a cheap, carrier capable jet trainer that could probably (still need to research it) operate from RN decks as well as American.

From a whole Defence perspective that wouldn't be a positive move. The RAN used the Macchi for armament training which the T2 Buckeye couldn't do, so the T2 wouldn't be a direct replacement for the Macchi as RAN pilots would need to earn to strafe and bomb on another platform, with its own conversion 'overhead'. Getting another jet trainer to do 1 job that isn't a good use of resources when the RAN managed to get car-quals without such a jet trainer.

How did the RN do this, did they have a jet trainer for car-quals?
 

SsgtC

Banned
From a whole Defence perspective that wouldn't be a positive move. The RAN used the Macchi for armament training which the T2 Buckeye couldn't do, so the T2 wouldn't be a direct replacement for the Macchi as RAN pilots would need to earn to strafe and bomb on another platform, with its own conversion 'overhead'. Getting another jet trainer to do 1 job that isn't a good use of resources when the RAN managed to get car-quals without such a jet trainer.

How did the RN do this, did they have a jet trainer for car-quals?
I wonder if the Macchi could be modified for carrier ops? I don't think any ever were, so I'm thinking not, but...

And I don't know what the RN did. Maybe they used the Sea Vampire? Though I could also see them using the same method that the RAN did, where their first carrier landing was in their operational aircraft.
 
I wonder if the Macchi could be modified for carrier ops? I don't think any ever were, so I'm thinking not, but...

And I don't know what the RN did. Maybe they used the Sea Vampire? Though I could also see them using the same method that the RAN did, where their first carrier landing was in their operational aircraft.

I doubt it, it was a pretty conventional design and ended up having fatigue issues in RAAF service.

I think the carrier capable trainer is a particularly USN thing, they'd be the only navy big enough to justify it. I suspect RAN practice would be taken directly from RN practice, the Sea Venom didn't appear to have a trainer version, nor did the Scimitar, Sea Vixen and Buccaneer.
 

SsgtC

Banned
I doubt it, it was a pretty conventional design and ended up having fatigue issues in RAAF service.
Ok, I didn't think it would be. But it never hurts to ask someone who's more familiar with the aircraft.

I think the carrier capable trainer is a particularly USN thing, they'd be the only navy big enough to justify it. I suspect RAN practice would be taken directly from RN practice, the Sea Venom didn't appear to have a trainer version, nor did the Scimitar, Sea Vixen and Buccaneer.

I concur, a bigger FAA would IMHO still qualify with your operational aircraft.
Makes sense. What about modifying some A-4Cs? A handful were in OTL. (Yeah, even the older C models). Drop a 28" plug into the fuselage, a bigger canopy, a second set of instruments and viola! A carrier capable trainer that can also be used for straffing, bombing and missile training.
 
Makes sense. What about modifying some A-4Cs? A handful were in OTL. (Yeah, even the older C models). Drop a 28" plug into the fuselage, a bigger canopy, a second set of instruments and viola! A carrier capable trainer that can also be used for straffing, bombing and missile training.

Possibly, but from a risk perspective it is better to lose a single pilot rather than two.
 
Makes sense. What about modifying some A-4Cs? A handful were in OTL. (Yeah, even the older C models). Drop a 28" plug into the fuselage, a bigger canopy, a second set of instruments and viola! A carrier capable trainer that can also be used for straffing, bombing and missile training.

IIRC the reason RAN T/A 4Gs were not taken on board was something about their CoG or something which made handling on or around the carrier tricky, too tricky for students.

The fact of the matter is that this wasn't a problem for the RAN, we have a solution looking for a problem.
 
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.

Several years ago, I read that Spain's Armada also sent their pilots to Pensacola. Even though they're flying VTOL, CTOL training was considered good experience for them. I believe they still do the same now, but cannot confirm that.

Regards,
 
Since the Armie de l’Aire already has schools that teach the basics of fixed-wing and rotary-wing flying, I suspect that they only send Aero-naval pilots to Pensecola for carrier-qualifications.
 
Top