z50\doc\web\2001\06\a3d.txt From: "Joseph Flood" To: arthurhu Subject: The A3 Skywarrior Date sent: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 22:23:50 -0500 Dear Arthur, Well I bet you never thought that a posting on your site would bring this much controversy. I wanted to add a little to what you wrote about the A3D. Nicknamed the whale, it was the largest carrier based operational plane. This true on both counts. It was subsonic attack bomber with 2 turbojets slung under the wings. They were not just two turbojets, they were J 57s each developing about 10,500 pounds of thrust. More than once they kept the crews I was in out of the water. Unlike the B 66 which had smaller engines The Air Force version was the B-66 Destroyer. If you will look at the jobs of these 2 planes you will see they were both built for different missions. A3D meant "All 3 Dead" with no ejection seats (compared to the USAF version), I'll tell you what A3D meant to me. It was built by Douglass and had 2 of everythig. As someone who flew over 3200 hours with 514 carrier landings I can tell you I would much rather have the 1200 pounds of fuel to be able to make one more approach than ejection seats. and often the worst pilots. I don't mean to be confrontational but why would you make a statement like that when you were talking about military aircraft? Try coming back to the ship on some dark, rainey night after 4.5 hours using celestial and radar navigation for 2,000 miles. Finding a 1000 ft long landing zone in the middle of the ocean with not enough fuel to divert to a shore based strip and then having to land 50,000 lbs of aircraft in a 350 ft landing space, traveling at a 130 kts (150 mph) with the ship pitching 20 feet peak to peak. Excuse me does that sound like inferior pilots to you? I think not. It was designed to be a strategic bomber, It was as good of a stratigic bomber as there was at that time. It used the same bombing system as was used by the BUFF and because it was carrier based it was more of a threat thenjust about anything. If you had 2 A4 tucked under your wings as "Buddy Bombers" you had the capability of hitting at least 4 targets. but that role went to the USAF, Being in a nuclear delivery crew is a lot like taking a woman's bra off and then kissing her on the lips. You practice, practice, practice but never use you knowledge. So I was very happy for the Air Force when they pulled this super coup and took this responsibility from me. so its main use in Vietnam was as a tanker, I'll tell you something. You want to know what it feels like to wonder if you are majing a difference in the job you are doing. Well you could walk into any bar where Marine and Naval Aviators hung out and when they found out you were a tanker crew you never bought another drink that night. There are thousands of men still walking this old earth because some A3, A4, or A6 tanker could hack it and went in to meet them, keep their cool and bring them out. Tankers have actually picked up a shot up bird a 100 or so miles from the ship and brought the stricken plane right to the "perch" and dropped him off to trap safely aboard. Oh, did I hear you right about "worst pilots"? I'm afraid not. and as an electronics jamming platform until replaced by the EA6A and EA6B as a jammer, and KA-6 as a tanker Planes just like people get old and tired. The EA 3 was not actually retired until 1991 almost 40 years after it was built. I am going to assume that you are an aircraft enthusiast, I appreciate that I am also but if you are going to print something that is supposed to be used as a reference piece, please make sure that you have all of the facts. Not to beat a dead horse to death, I am still alive today because I had the distinct privilage to fly with some the most ballsy, bravest, talented bunch of Naval Aviators this world has ever known. I have no regrets and would strap an A3D onto my big broad but in a heartbeat. I am sincerly yours, Joe Flood From: "ar15moto" To: Subject: Your military website Date sent: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 17:03:34 -0700 You have pissed off quite a few people with your description of the Douglas A-3 Skywarrior. I have over 1,000 hours in it as a Crewchief, that was done from 1897 to 1989. I can tell that your description is based on biased and uninformed conjecture, not actual experince of either flying them or working on them. There has been no aircraft in the US Navy inventory that did the job that the A-3 Skywarrior did. It outlasted the Douglas POS B-66 by years. The A-3 proved its worth to the US Navy and to the US Governement time and time again. It is STILL flying to this day with Raytheon out of Van Nuys, Kalifornication. There is no aircraft that replaced the A-3. You should head on over the A-3 Skywarrior website and check it out. Look at the guestbook. I for one feel that your description dishonors the men who flew in the A-3 and died for our country, and it dishonors the men and women who put their sweat, blood and tears into the A-3 while working on them. Joe Hawkins