skyman
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 82
|
Post by skyman on Feb 10, 2016 20:36:39 GMT 12
Never forget you are an armourer Paddy, once an armourer always an armourer (just like the US Marines). We had a lot of good times back then with a lot of good air force guys and gals, and of course, aircraft.
Stay positive Paddy, there are more than a few people back here in NZ thinking about you.
Remember the 75 Squadron motto, Ake Ake Kia Kaha.
Alan R
|
|
skyman
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 82
|
Post by skyman on May 21, 2015 10:33:45 GMT 12
My wife and I were also on the Wings tour but I think my wife enjoyed the shopping more than the airshow.
Kiwi Red put on a really great show and there was a newly updated TA-4K Kahu Skyhawk on static display. The AN124 showed how a really big aircraft can be thrown around the sky, which amazed the crowd, I wonder if the pilot really was drunk? The USAF C-5 stayed on the ground for some reason.
It was a great airshow all round and I thoroughly enjoyed it.
|
|
skyman
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 82
|
Post by skyman on May 14, 2015 11:07:49 GMT 12
I certainly enjoyed NZ Wings for almost 40 years, but the lack of NZ content and the inclusion of past Wings articles to fill out the magazine finally forced me to give it up. Over the years I have contributed several articles and have a few more, especially visiting military aircraft photographs, I could submit which would be of interest to readers. However, until things change I won't be resubscribing nor submitting articles. Bring back NZ Wings I say.
|
|
skyman
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 82
|
Post by skyman on May 2, 2015 20:02:04 GMT 12
Regarding the atrium Vampire; while attending the 75 Squadron reunion in May/June last year a couple of us were given a guided tour of the museum. Our guide, Simon Moody, told us the only damage suffered during the earthquake(s) was to the atrium Vampire when a cable broke which allowed the aircraft to swing free. The damage was a slightly crumpled tip of the starboard tail boom below the rudder when the aircraft swung into a concrete pillar. Asked if it was to be repaired, we were told it wouldn't be and would be a lasting reminder of the earthquake.
|
|
skyman
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 82
|
Post by skyman on Mar 12, 2015 9:53:29 GMT 12
Back in early 1965 while stationed at Tengah with the Canberras of 14 Squadron I recall seeing an RAF Canberra with a round intake-type hole in each of its wing-tip tanks where the nav light usually fitted, but I don't remember to which squadron it belonged. I later figured these to be for air sampling.
On another occasion with 14 Squadron Canberras at Tengah during 1969 all personnel working on the aircraft were instructed to keep their hands away from their faces and to wash thoroughly before eating or drinking. This was due to the possibility of our Canberras picking up fallout from the Chinese atmospheric nuclear tests.
Al.
|
|
skyman
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 82
|
Post by skyman on May 12, 2014 16:40:16 GMT 12
Paddy, the story of your stroke made me realise that we can be struck down at any time, any place and even armourers are not bullet-proof . . . a scary thought and something to bear in mind.
As armourers we worked together on 75 Squadron more than a few years ago and I know all armourers are thinking of you and wishing you well.
Alan R.
|
|
skyman
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 82
|
Post by skyman on Dec 28, 2013 18:38:32 GMT 12
In my day SULC stood for Strikemaster (or Skyhawk) Underwing Luggage Container. These pods were swapped between 14 and 75 Squadron wherever they were needed.
Al.
|
|
skyman
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 82
|
Post by skyman on Dec 28, 2013 12:58:21 GMT 12
To me this looks very much like a 300 US gallon Skyhawk under-wing fuel tank without the tail-fins. During my time with Skyhawks (and Strikemasters) baggage pods were made from the outer casings of 7-shot rocket launchers and much smaller than a 300 gallon tank and could be carried by Skyhawks and Strikemasters.
Al.
|
|
skyman
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 82
|
Post by skyman on Oct 15, 2013 19:51:29 GMT 12
Alan Wallace was a true gentleman with a great sense of humour. I worked with Alan on 75 and 14 Squadrons and always enjoyed his company whether at work or in the mess. He will be sorely missed. RIP Alan.
|
|
skyman
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 82
|
Post by skyman on Sept 9, 2013 15:11:07 GMT 12
Hi, my name is Alan Reynolds.
I live in Tauranga.
I am somewhat older than I would like to be.
My main interest is military aircraft, particularly combat jets, but if it has a pilot and it flies I'm interested.
I spent many years in the RNZAF as an armourer, most of them at Ohakea, working on Vampires and Strikemasters, but mostly on Canberras and Skyhawks, and I have also worked for a short time with Sunderlands and Harvards. During my almost 20 years at Ohakea I had three postings each to both 14 Squadron and 75 Squadron. My last posting was 3 years at Woodbourne (which in my opinion was enough to drive anyone potty).
I belong to the RNZAFA, 75 Squadron Association and the Hamilton branch of the Royal Aeronautical Society. I also spend time at the Classic Flyers museum in Mt Maunganui working on their A-4 Skyhawk.
I have in my garage 16 scratch built wooden model aircraft, built many years ago by my father which I am trying to update/repair when I get time.
My favourite aviation book at the moment has got to be "Skyhawks, the History of the RNZAF Skyhawk", a great piece of work.
Cheers, Al.
|
|
skyman
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 82
|
Post by skyman on Sept 8, 2013 14:28:05 GMT 12
Tengah flight line. Lineys having their usual chat about who brought the beer money! More likely Foxy Hill and two others whose names I can't seem to recall are probably discussing whether to go to Halfway House or Bugis Street or both after a few at the McGregor Club! Photo looks like it was taken sometime in 1969. Skyman / Al.
|
|
skyman
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 82
|
Post by skyman on Sept 8, 2013 14:12:35 GMT 12
Great photos. Keep em coming if you have more! I can relate to the tropical rain. Not so great if you are working on the aircraft at the time, but good for cooling things down and flushing all the crap out of the monny drains! Righto Don, there seems to be a bit of interest, so here goes...This is not the 14 Sqn pan, It was wher 60 used to park their Javelins so must be after 1966, but there are four Vulcans in the line-up! 74 Squadron with their Lightnings arrived at Tengah mid-1967 and this line-up also shows a T-13 Canberra. I was on all of the four Vanguards in 1969 and 1970 and do not recall having a T-13 on any of those deployments. My guess is this photo was probably taken in 1968. Skyman / Al.
|
|
skyman
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 82
|
Post by skyman on Sept 6, 2013 20:33:16 GMT 12
Visitors to the W/Os and SNCOs mess at Ohakea, if sober enough, may see a mounted tiger's head hanging on a wall or pillar. The story behind this trophy goes back to 1970 when two 14 Squadron (Canberra) guys, one "snatcher" and one getaway driver, liberated it from a certain RAF Tiger Squadron based at Tengah, Singapore. It somehow found its way back to Ohakea and eventually the "snatcher" donated the trophy to the mess. When I was last there for the 75 Squadron Association reunion its fur had somehow taken on a somewhat gaudy yellow colour, no doubt to try and spruce it up a bit. It brought back some great memories.
Al.
|
|
skyman
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 82
|
Post by skyman on Sept 6, 2013 19:51:56 GMT 12
I can only add my congratulations to Don and Nick on a very fine book, it is most impressive and a great history of our fine Skyhawks, I really enjoyed my time working with them. The only minuscule correction I can suggest, if I may, is the photo at the bottom of page 114; the mountain shown is Mt Arayat, Mt Pinatubo is off in the other direction. I may have already mentioned it to you Don, my memory cells may need dusting off.
One gripe I have with this thread is that absolutely disgusting "H....." swear word some people keep using when talking about Skyhawks and F-16s, it gets me so riled up I could burst a blood vessel!
Must make time to re-read the best book in my library.
Al.
|
|
skyman
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 82
|
Post by skyman on Sept 4, 2013 15:54:50 GMT 12
If it weren't for Armourers the rest of you would just be members of a big flying club!
Al.
|
|
skyman
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 82
|
Post by skyman on Sept 4, 2013 15:40:48 GMT 12
Having read and heard several blunders on more than a few occasions the one that happened to me a while back is rarely mentioned if ever, so here it is.
Just prior to the last overseas 14 Squadron Canberra deployment before they were sold, it must have been late 1969 or early 1970, the squadron had their last (in NZ) heavy weapons programme to drop 1000lb high explosive bombs at Kaipara. Two of us armourers were assigned to test the armament circuits of the aircraft to be used. I was monitoring the test box which was plugged into the bomb bay and reading the servicing procedures from the aircraft door to the other team member who was in the cockpit driving the switches. All systems were go.
Next day the two (?) Canberras were towed to the end of runway 27 where we fitted each aircraft with four 25lb practice bombs on a light series bomb carrier and two 1000lb HE bombs on an Avro Triple bomb carrier. While the NCO i/c was checking each load he instructed me to plug in the two aircraft release circuit plugs to each carrier. It was usual to do this by squeezing between the 1000lb bomb and the bomb door which brought you closer to the carrier sockets but on this occasion for reasons I cannot fathom I reached over from the front of the bombs. The first plug, for normal release, went in very easily but the second one, for emergency jettison, would not line up properly try as I might, I got the feeling it was a bit distorted (was it trying to tell me something?). Anyway, after a lot of fiddling it lined up and I pushed it home.........then there was a loud "click" and the bomb I was leaning on dropped away and landed with a mighty "clang" on the concrete at my feet and rolled over. At this point I then found myself crouching almost under the practice bombs alongside the NCO i/c at the other end of the bomb bay wondering what the hell I had just done.
The investigation found that after the circuit check the previous day the guy in the cockpit had been caught out by a built-in "Murphy", the bomb jettison switch had a gate fitted over it to prevent inadvertent operation which had to be raised first. This gate had a hole in it to fit over the switch when in the "off" position.....it also had a hole to fit over the switch in the "on" position and that is what happened, the jettison circuit was "live"!
About an hour after the event I was sitting in the 14 Squadron line hut with a strong cup of coffee, thought about what had just happened and what could have resulted (squashed between bomb and door or big "bang"!) and got the shakes. The reason the second 1000lb bomb didn't jettison as well was put down to carrier distortion as the first bomb fell, jamming the release unit. The bomb was retrieved and fitted to another aircraft for its one-way trip to Kaipara and the NCO i/c and the cockpit guy both had closed door sessions with the OC Tech. As I was only the guy who was reading the SPs for the guy in the cockpit and only the mug who plugged it in at the NCO i/cs request (and who should have checked the switches) I survived the investigation.
Al.
|
|
skyman
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 82
|
Post by skyman on Sept 1, 2013 19:45:12 GMT 12
As a new guy to the forum I have been trolling through to see anything interesting in my field so I am a little late on this one.
From a purely external armament point of view of the "dinosaur" Skyhawks (I left the RNZAF at the start of Kahu) there was no difference between the A-4K and the TA-4K, so during weapons programmes it didn't matter to us whether A-4 or TA-4, but the cockpits were a different story, but usually only during ILM or DLM(is it still called that?).
As armourers we were responsible for the canopy jettison and ejection seat systems and although the ejection seats were exactly the same the systems were somewhat different. Whereas the single seat A-4 had a total of 10 separate explosive devices in and around the cockpit, excluding the parachute ballistic spreader, the two-seat TA-4 had about 26, if my memory serves me correctly.
Following the initial pull of any of the canopy jettison handles or the ejection seat the operation of the canopy jettison and ejection systems relied on gas pressure produced by explosive devices connected by piping. To carry out a flow-and-leak check on this piping each explosive device had to be disconnected and/or removed so the A-4 was much preferred over the TA-4. Also some of the TA-4 devices almost required a contortionist to reach while those of the A-4 could all be reached from beside the cockpit. I believe Paddy has explained about one or two of the TA-4 devices which are out of sight and can only be reached by one hand. Without dismantling part of the rear instrument panel a group of four devices could only be reached by going head first into the rear cockpit and working inverted! Once all was tested and reconnected, and you double, triple and quadruple checked everything, as did the independent inspector, you signed your life away.
So from an ILM or DLM point of view I ALWAYS preferred the single seat A-4, but as Don pointed out we could get flights in the TA-4.
Cheers, Al
|
|
skyman
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 82
|
Post by skyman on Aug 30, 2013 21:22:55 GMT 12
As a newbie I have only just found this thread, but as an ex-towed target operator I can tell you about what is shown in the photos of the back-end of NZ3546 and how it worked. The targets were towed for the navy ships to allow them to harmonise their radar and guns and try to shoot the target.
The "spikes" shown in the second photo are mounts for electro-magnetic release units, they are also on the lower containers as well. The larger top containers each held a rolled-up, red, radar-reflecting, 30 foot sleeve drogue fitted with bungee cords hooked over the rear of the container to assist in launching. Tied into each rolled-up drogue was a long flat release on the end of a length of steel wire cable with the release hooked through the drogue towing ring.
In each of the smaller lower containers was a rolled-up small (about 3 foot) "messenger" drogue with a short wire cable and towing ring.
Directly inside the aircraft's large cargo doors and mounted in the luggage area was fitted the electrically-operated drogue towing winch with over 6000 feet of steel wire cable. Attached to the back-end of the winch was a four-tube cable guide which passed through the toilet area (you had to step over it for a pee) and was attached to the front-end of the square-section tube, the back-end of which passed out of the aircraft immediately below the tail cone and was fitted with four rollers.
Each drogue cable passed through its corresponding messenger ring before being pulled up inside the aircraft through the tube. The number one drogue cable was connected directly to the swaged end on the winch towing cable with the other three drogue cables pinned to stow points at the forward end of the four-tube cable guides ready for use if the first drogue was shot off.
As mentioned by Shorty the main cargo door was fitted with a transparent dome below which was a fold-down seat for the target operator, he sat right beside the towing winch. Alongside this station were the release switches for the drogues and messengers.
Once the operating area was reached, usually in the Hauraki Gulf or off the Bay of Plenty, the first drogue was released and paid out under control of the winch brake (which usually emitted heaps of smoke) until 6000 feet of cable was reached. The aircraft would then fly a race-track pattern well forward of the ship and the target operator would watch the fall of shot (usually 4.5 inch) to make sure it was around the target and not migrating up the cable. If the target was shot off its messenger was released which flew down the cable and hooked onto the target release, then the cable was wound in, that target's swaged end released into the sea along with its messenger and the next drogue cable connected to the winch cable and then it was released and paid out.
If the drogue was not shot off by the end of the exercise it's messenger was released which flew down the cable, tripped the drogue release which dropped the drogue into the sea and hooked itself onto the release. The winch was not powerful enough to wind in the cable with the drogue attached and the messenger (which was a lot smaller) stabilized the cable end while it was wound in. As the drogue release reached the aircraft and was pulled up the tube it tripped and released the messenger into the sea. We then proceeded to beat-up the ship, if a C-47 could be said to "beat-up"! I hope the above makes some sense. It does sound a bit complicated and believe me it could be complicated and things didn't always go according to plan, but looking back it was fun if not a little exciting.
Cheers, Al.
|
|
skyman
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 82
|
Post by skyman on Jul 29, 2013 14:27:27 GMT 12
Posted by Skyman
I was halfway through my first year in the RNZAF when the DC-3 crashed in July 1963 and in December while on leave I climbed with my father to the top of Thompsons Track from the Matamata side and then up to the top of Mt Ngatamahinerua and down to the crash site. There were signs indicating the way up a rough track and indications there had been more than a few sightseers at the crash site. I took several black and white photos of the scene which are now in my album. The remains of a once proud DC-3 were a very sobering sight, but as a teenager I never really appreciated the real tragedy of it. It was only later in life that it hit home how tragic this accident really was and the excellent TV documentary brought it all back to me.
|
|