THE BATTLE OF PALMDALE: A Remarkable Dogfighting Debacle That Exposed US Technological Folly
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 25 май 2023
- On August 16th, 1956 two state-of-the-art F-89D Scorpions intercepted a runaway Hellcat drone over Southern California. In a two hour engagement, they fired 208 folding fin aircraft rockets without hitting the slow-moving Hellcat. Instead, the rockets rained down on the unsuspecting residents of Palmdale California, who endured an aerial bombardment that destroyed cars, damaged houses and ignited a huge brush fire that burned for days.
Analysis after the fact should have shown USAF planners the folly of relying on immature missile guidance and computer control technology. Instead, they doubled down in their belief that the gun was dead. A decade later, this failure to challenge their dogma would risk the lives of US aviators in the skies of Vietnam.
This video is the first in a short series that explores the American interceptors of the 1950s and ‘60s. I hope you enjoy it as I find it a fascinating period of startling ambition, extraordinary progress and tragic folly.
I’d also like to thank all of you who watched my last video, on the HAVE DRILL. It's been really exciting to see how many people have a shared interest in the depths of dogfighting history. I recognise that the audio on that video wasn’t the best and have worked hard to improve it on this one. Comments and suggestions on that, or any other topic much appreciated.
Notes:
- I have done my best to show a realistic map of the Hellcat's path on the day, but I failed to find any good sources of information on it. Please therefore take the maps as my best guess, intended to help someone who is not resident in LA understand the layout, but in no way authoritative
- None of the contemporary or more recent reporting specifies the type of aircraft used as the mother plane. I believe it was an Avenger because those were used in other drone trials. The Korean War muddies the picture because an A1 Skyraider was used to control the Hellcat 'missiles'. In this case I am relatively sure about the Avenger because Kurowski had only 200 rounds of 50 calibre to fire at the Hellcat. This tallies with the ammunition capacity of a late model Avenger
Sources:
I used numerous sources to understand the drone programme, the capabilities of the F89 Scorpion and the events of August 16th 1956. These are the main ones:
- I based the 'dramatic' elements of the story on this Pageant Magazine article from 1957: scvhistory.com/scvhistory/lw2...
-This set of forum posts has a good amount of detail on Project Option: www.secretprojects.co.uk/thre...
-I found this dissertation on drone combat enlightening for the early history of Project Option. It is also philosophically interesting if a little long. escholarship.org/content/qt0f...
- Initial commentary on the F89's history, role and so on came from the excellent (but now sadly out of print) Aerofax Datagraph #8 - F-89 Scorpion by Gerald Balzer
- Much of my information about the F89's characteristics and about how its computer controlled fire control system functioned came from the technical manual issued to aircrews. Warning, this is a 400 page read! archive.org/details/NorthropF...
- This NACA (now NASA) research memorandum contains some interesting details on the function of the E-4 (note, not 6, but comparable) fire control system and how the pilot used it: ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/1...
Back in the eighties I once attended a professional meeting on aerospace instrumentation. At dinner I ended up sitting next to an engineer who worked at one of the military's missle test ranges. He explained how the Sidewinder missles under test would be setup with an offset to make sure they missed the target drone, as the drones were expensive. With the Hughes Falcon they found the offset was not required, as it never hit the drone anyway. Their nickname for the Falcon was "the friendly missle".
I love that! Sounds like a good title for a Falcon video :)
As I understand it the Falcon was even less effective than you might imagine because it didn’t even have a proximity fuse. So an incredibly ineffective seeker head combined with poor maneuverability and the need to score a direct hit on the target. Not a winning combination.
Not a lot changes. In the 80s I was friendly with a guy who worked as an electronics engineer for the British military. I can't remember which SAM or RPG he and his team were working on, but he told me that some of their "improvements" frightened the crap out of them when it came to testing time. He recalled firing one missile which suddenly shot off at nearly 90 degrees from the aim point. Everyone dived into the safety trenches.
@@travelbugse2829sounds like the Swingfire missile
@@SteelxWolf Any more info?
I love it. The Navy said to the F6F that you are going up to be a target. And the F6F said only if you can catch me. My hats off to the F6F stubbornness.
"Nay, you shall not. I shall enter a gentle turn to thwart you, Scorpion!"
The F6F was a fighter, and would not go down without a fight!
Robo-Cat was the inspiration for Han Solo's, " Besides, I know a few maneuvers. We’ll lose them!" a gentile turn to the left....NO, NOT REALLY..
Trained dogs want to please their master, trained cats will do whatever pleases the cat.
the Navy just needed a bigger rocket.
“Fiendish evasive maneuver of a gentle turn”😂
What’s amazing. My grandfather, born in 1889 grew up when the normal mode of transportation was on foot, or using a wagon. By 1960, he was 70 years old and was driving an air conditioned pickup truck to an airport where he could fly anywhere in the US in less than 6 hours.
It’s almost unimaginable how far technology has progressed in his life time. He passed away in 1983. From no airplanes at all to space shuttle and Apollo moon landings.
After watching the original movie, with the biplanes attacking King Kong, I asked my mother (born 1920) if, when a plane flew over, she would run out to see it. And she said, "When a car drove by we ran out to see it."
@@scriptsmith4081 I so miss that generation. They knew hardship and were unfazed by life’s normal everyday difficulties while being fascinated by what is today, routine.
I hear ya. I was born in 1978. I remember seeing the the first or second apple computer at school. I can't remember how many times I played the Oregon trail. Lol!! Eight tracks, then cassette tapes, then CDs. The CD cases in the store were huge!! I played pacman on the Atari 2600. Then Nintendo came to america in 1987 or 88. Mind blown. Then doom came out!!! IDKFA!!!! What a great time to be alive.
@@scriptsmith4081 My gran used to tell me in the early 1960s that they would watch biplane airliners flying over London - this was before WW2. I think she was referring to Handley Page Hannibals. If the wind was strong, she said, they would hardly move at all.
Yet the retirement age hasn't dropped. Progress! 🤣
The lack of proper gunsights or even guns for that matter is another classic example of why embracing new technology should NOT mean entirely discarding the old, tried and tested ones.
They would pull the same stunt with the F-4 Phantom later on where they had to develop an external gun pod for it because it's hand full of missiles proved insufficient.
@@moondog8353 That is true for the Vietnam era tech, when IFF was still crude and so most engagements were done in visual range, which puts guns to be a possible option, but the Phantom was obviously not meant for that job, it was an interceptor, thus the only missile loadout, while the crusader was meant to be the dogfighter with the guns. We all know that the gun pod was added for the airforce Phantoms, but the gunsights was not aligned for the phantoms, on the other hand the Navy phantoms never fitted on Guns but created top gun, which trained the pilots to take advantage of their aircraft and its weapons, and the navy saw an increase in kills with the phantom, more than the Airforce. The best example of missiles maturing would be the gulf war, where IFF technology has advanced far enough to actually have BVR combat and where BVR was widely used, other examples are the many conflicts in which israel had missiles but whoever it was going against did not, you get the idea.
@@moondog8353 I'm so tired of the gun-less Phantom myth. Having no gun was the least of the problems.
Its like thinking bayonets are no longer necessary. Modern day urban and trench warfare might beg to differ.
@@dudududu1926 Trained pilots by John Boyd was the real problem. If only USAF training had been better then the effectiveness would have been noticeable. The US Navy F4's were doing fine...
This video brought back memories when I was a kid in Eugene Oregon in the late 50s, early 60's. A Scorpian was delivered to the Eugene airport to be deactivated and put in a park for children to play in, but I got to it first. I went to the airport (no security then) to look at the Scorpian, it was sitting there and I just walked up to it and tried to open the canopy. Unsuccessful, I went to the tower and asked how to get in. The attendant explained how to do just that and said, "Don't fiddle with any switches." that was one of the coolest days of my life. At that same airport, they had the remains of a Hellcat with the seat and stick and I personally conquered the Japanese!
It's amazing just how chill things were back then. Love it.
@@kutter_ttl6786 / People were more trust worthy and friendly. We would wave to strangers and never ask, "Who was that!"
Just the fact that you would even go ask somebody re how to gain access...
@@JTA1961 / I saw the plane some years later and it had been, virtually ground into the sand by the kids!
The Soviet Union missed a trick by not simply using An-2 transport biplanes as nuclear bombers as the US wouldn't have been able to intercept them. Incidentally, An-2s were converted to decoy drones in the recent Kharabakh conflict and may see use in Ukraine as well
Given their range they only would have been able to strike at targets in Alaska
Be mindful not to be shot for treason. Be safe everybody. The internet props ain't worth it.
You kid but. in the Koreas, one of the problems facing the South Korean and USAF defenders are North Korean An-2, flying very low, very slow and with fabric fuselages...
@@whitewolf6605 Wait...are you serious?
@@jlvfr It was not an AN-2. It was Po-2. Much smaller, older and much slower plane. AN-2 have an aluminum frame and body.
The airstrip the F89s were based on is now Camarillo airport. The mascot of the Adolfo Camarillo high school is a scorpion in honor of the F89.
When I was in Jr High I used to ride my bike out to Camarillo airport. I got to wander all over back then and I graduated from ACHS.
I was driving through Panamint Valley (It's the next valley west of Death Valley) when I saw an airplane that looked like he was making a simulated attack run on me.
I checked my mirrors and saw no one else around me so I started jinking from one side of the road to the other. I doubt it would have made any difference, but I figured the pilot would see me and know what I was doing.
He flew over and I started driving normally again, then the pilot flew over me again then performed a perfect aileron roll. Telling me, quite clearly that his simulated attack had been successful.
I flashed my lights but I don't know if he say.
An aircraft "that evolved in the primordial soup of post-war jet development." Great description/prose!
😂haaaaa, he was on point thru out
During the V-1 strikes on Great Britain, WW2, RAF interceptors found that shooting the V-1 would cause such a blast and flying debris that they would get caught up in it.
Therefore they created a maneuver where they flew alongside the missile, then tipped one of its wings with their own wing, causing the unguided V-1 to dive uncontrollably into the ground.
The only thing the US Navy needed was an interceptor that could fly as slowly as the Hellcat.
Another Hellcat!
Love that! The drones could actually be converted back to having a pilot as they were ferried that way. I wonder how long the conversion process took?
Prolly wouldn't have worked. The V1 had a very primitive inertia platform that could not correct for that upset. I'm willing to bet that the Hellcat drones were more sophisticated.
@@HotelPapa100 Well they could have used machineguns like the other plane tried but it was too slow.
Some sources say that the other method was to place their wing tips in front of the V-1's wingtip, upsetting the airflow of the wing. This would cause the wing to dip and the simple gyros in the V-1 couldn't compensate for that, so it lost control and plunged down.
@@HotelPapa100 I bet not. Recovering from a spin or stall is hard enough for a human. This Hellcat wasn't intended to be autonomous - it had a remote pilot. So perhaps due to misfortune, perhaps due to to the most rudimentary auto-pilot, when control was lost, the controls were in a neutral position without need for trim. What's amazing is that it didn't almost immediately spin into the desert at the end of the runway. That autopilot would not be sophisticated enough to do anything except fly straight and level.
Congrats to the narrator, who completed the script on one breath of air!
Missed my calling as a free diver…
@@notapound Your videos are great for the content and very informative, but whatever cutting and splicing you're doing needs more work. At multiple points it feels like I'm having a stroke.
This was an absolutely enjoyable rendition of this oft-overlooked battle in the skies over Southern California. I worked with Falcons and Genies throughout my USAF tour of duty (F101s & F106s).
What was your view of the Falcon at the time? The majority of ADC veteran interviews I’ve seen suggest that they held it in higher regard than TAC because of its suitability for the interceptor mission. Was this your view at the time? I’d love to know!
@@notapound Bruce Gordon has a RUclips presence (Spirit of Attack). He flew the F-106 and he numerous times gave his opinion over several videos. "Aircrew Interview" also had him as a guest.
@@notapound As has been mentioned, former F-106 pilot Bruce Gordon talks about the AIM-4 on his youtube channel and his opinion is that it's a fine missile, so long as it's paired with the correct radar and fire control system. The F-106 has this system, built specifically for the Falcon missile, but other fighters such as the F-4 Phantom do not, which is what Gordon attributes the negative reviews to. In an exercise, Gordon made a successful head-on shot against an oncoming BOMARC cruise missile in a supersonic pass using an F-106 and a Falcon missile.
@@notapound For another take, there is a documentary about the AIM-9 Sidewinder missile out there, where they describe a fly-off (or is it a shootout?) between the Sidewinder and the Falcon. The Falcon showed up at the airfield with a crew of technicians and required a lot of prep before flight, whereas the Sidewinder was much easier to handle by ordinance men arming the aircraft. The Sidewinder, of course, also requires a lot less electronic support from the shooting aircraft, doesn't even need a radar, and so it was easier to get accepted by the users. The Falcon later evolved into the AIM-54 Phoenix used on the F-14 Tomcat, and was reportedly very successfully employed by the Iranians against the Iraqi air force in the 1980s. Different tools for different jobs.
That MiG-17 found out that the bad ass little A4 was not to be trifled with!
"It was also using the fiendish evasive manoeuvre of a gentle turn."
-
"Boy, this guy knows some manoeuvres!"
At 8 years old I vaguely recall a lot of adult conversation about something happening in the desert. Our family, my father a Navy MSC officer, had just been stationed at Camp Pendelton, CA . It explains one of those childhood memories. Narragansett Bay
Narragansett bay? Quonset Point Naval Air Base?
@@andreperrault5393 Close, Quonset is on the West Side of the Bay. My father was stationed there; Returning from Saipan before my appearance, he wore Naval Air Green uniform, before his transfer to the USN Medical College. My family returned to my mother's home and NAVSTA Newport. Dad rounded out 30 yrs as W-4. I too served in the Navy, although my Service was Silent. serving on non-target ships. My older brother a yellow shirt on the Randolph, TI and Champ. Narragansett Bay
Back around the same year, a small general aviation aircraft, maybe a Taylorcraft Auster, took off by itself (the pilot for some reason, had got out of the cockpit) near Sydney NSW. It climbed steadily then levelled out, heading for a heavily populated area. The RAAF were called out to shoot it down while that could still be safely done. The fighters, which I think were Gloster Meteors with cannon, couldn't slow down enough to get a good shot, so aborted the effort. Eventually, they sent up an old Wirraway ( first cousin to a NA Texan), with a guy in the back seat with a Bren gun.That worked!!
More successful against unmanned planes than they were against the Emu's 😂
Only the Aussies would think of this!
The Wirraway guns failed due to the cold and high altitude and they broke of the attack. Apparently the RAN offered to shoot it down using Sea Furies but the RAAF declined. The official statement said it fell into the sea. The RAN claimed it was full of 20mm holes when it did.
Good old Bren!
I don’t know whether to laugh or cry - such is “wicked” problems
Crazy! Folly is right word to describe the blind reliance on the unproven technology to defend the country against soviet bombers. What an amazing flying skill about the shootdown of the Mig 17 by the A4 with a Zuni rocket!
Much like the American torpedoes used in the early months of the war. Turns out the development team never tested the torpedoes, as each cost 10,000 dollars. Nope, simply issued the untested torpedoes, then argued US submariners weren't properly using those. Finally the torpedoes were tested. Turned out the firing pin was weak, the force of impact bent it so the explosives never detonated.
@@verilyheld They were willing to risk submarines, the sailors, and the captains' careers before they even considered their untested warez didn't quite work.
@@verilyheld The Firing pins weren't weak. Rather, the magnetic exploder was improperly calibrated for the target ships/locations, and the contact fuse firing pin was set at 90 degrees from in line with impact force. When the torpedoes ran into the ship's hull, the firing pin tube was crushed, and the steel pin couldn't set off the torpedo.
The simplest field-expedient modification to improve torpedo reliability was by replacing the steel firing pin with aluminum (weaker material) because it was so much lighter, it could set off the fuse faster than the old steel firing pins.
@@tonyennis1787 You misunderstand the concept of an arrogant bureaucrat. NONE OF THAT MATTERS as long as his personal reputation stays intact. After all, those things only affect "someone else."
@@Skyfighter64 Very well, though either way, firing pin or firing pin tube, not testing the torpedoes was criminal, bordering on treason.
"They just needed a bigger rocket." LOL
Nope, a SMARTER missile.
…sadly the poor old F-89 got the AIM-4 Falcon…
Can you imagine the anguish of the navy guy having to ask the air force for help? Talk about "Through gritted teeth."! 😆
I grew up in Palmdale but wasn't born until 1957. I wish my Dad was still around to ask. He was a Northrop Experimental Test Pilot out of Plant 42 in Palmdale. T'was a very interesting place to grow up during that era. A lot of wild & crazy things went on in the skies over The Antelope Valley in North Los Angeles County at that time. Thanks for sharing!
This entire story is a superb example of the old adage, 'just because you can, doesn't mean you should!'
Wow, interesting... I worked as a civilian for the US Air Force in the public affairs/history office at Edwards AFB (Muroc AAF until 1952) just north of Palmdale/Lancaster from 2005 to 2020... and I never had heard about this whole incident from anyone who worked at the base (and there were many still there working there when I worked there) or came across any records of this incident while in the history office the whole time I was working there... now that's a coverup!
A very unsightly pimple indeed.
I've always like the F-89. Never found a plastic model of this plane at the local drug store that I could afford. I did build a lot of Gee Bees . They sold for only $ .75
It is a real Buck Rogers type of aeroplane.
Revell did one which I built in the period, painted the red areas as best I could. I think it was in a series of the newest air force fighters along with the F-102 and the F-104. I think they sold for a buck each at the drug store. Oh, and the F-101 too.
@@whalesong999 Think there were any plans to twin mustang the F-89 ? ruclips.net/video/A3qioRbLyFY/видео.html
The F-89 is such a neat machine, despite it's inherent lousiness. The 50s was such a great time for aircraft design - all the interesting things that were tried!
I never realized until a few of this channels' videos how specialized certain early aircraft were (F-102 and Scorpion specifically.) I always thought they were just crappy fighters. It turns out, they were both competent interceptors designed to stop high-value targets. In that regard, the pieces click into place.
Excellent video and narration! History is so important and a great teacher if only we are willing to listen and take the lessons to heart.
I worked on the F 102 fire control system and it was all vacuum tube analog as was the system in the F 101B.
Interesting… that is great to know! There is so little information about those early computers out there. I’ve spent countless hours searching for it :(
Just recently found your channel. As an air combat enthusiast and native Palmdalian, this one made me smile. Not the first time I've heard the story but always a fun one to listen to. Thanks!
The Bismarks fire control computers just could not work around the very slow old swordfish torpedo bombers and cost it dearly. another example of high tech being defeated by old tech..love your work..
In order to believe that story you have to believe that the Nazis were so stupid that they didn't configure their weapon systems to counteract the primary naval strike aircraft of their primary opponent. I find that impossible to believe.
Wasn't the nickname for the biplane Fairy Swordfish "The Stringbag"??, but yes, the ignominy of you having the latest and greatest battleship, only to be destroyed by a fabric and wire 1930 biplane.....
Also being mainly fabric and wire, could probably take a lot of flak without major damage.. aka Hawker Hurricane .....
This does seem to be something of a myth, and a rather interesting one at that. The Swordfishes took hits, a lot of hits (one apparently flew back with 178 individual holes), so we know that at least some of Bismarcks guns were able to land hits. (Likely the smaller guns as these were visually aimed and didn’t suffer from the design problems with the AA fire directors) The issue seems to be a combination of the Swordfishes light construction allowing HE shells to over-pen; Bismarcks fire control directors being flawed in concept, and compromised in construction; it’s AA armament being a bit shit regardless of anything else*; the difficulty of hitting aircraft aboard a fast, maneuvering ship; and the poor lighting and visibility surrounding those air strikes.
Actually, as much as it was an outdated airframe, I’d hazard to say that the Swordfish present in that operation were some of the most technologically advanced weapons present in that battle. And the reason I say that is those aircraft were some of the first successful all weather strike platforms, their radar sets proving vital to finding the Bismarck amidst the darkness of night.
*If you’re wondering why they were trash, Bismarcks heavy AA armament were slow firing compared to their contemporaries, especially at lower elevations. They also had a slow traverse speed and offered little protection from the elements. The medium AA guns had an abysmal fire rate compared to their contemporaries, and a relatively poor traverse rate. Despite having a heavier shell than some other guns, the smaller number of barrels also reduced the total weight of shot being sent down range.
Great story! Thoroughly enjoyed this one.
I cheered for the Hellcat!
Amazing story and history.
"...Pulling down three California-Edison power lines as a last [Eff-You] gesture."
I’d like to register the Attack along Forty Foot. Actually it was me driving along side Forty Drain in The Fens in a D Series Ford box van being used by a pair of A10 Warthogs for practice runs. Quite a thrill for a teenager with an interest in aircraft. Thanks to two pilots who needed a bit of fun.
I'll take it that was 'the Fens' in Cambridgeshire U.K & the A.10's from Bentwaters/Woodbridge in Suffolk ????
I live in neighbouring LFA.5 where military (planes) ARE cleared to go down as low as 250ft
Was going down a wide expanse wide open Norfolk lane in my old V.6 Granada 2.9 back in 2010
Two x 4 Sqdn Harriers "blitzed" my car & $hit the life out of me as the sunny sky went BLACK momentarily
They were EASILY down at 250ft & would've given any older man a savage heart attack doing that
After the shock (& seeing the Black/Yellow/Red 4 Sqdn tailfins) I started roaring with laughter.
Grieves me that they ("Harriers") were retired so soon after that event took place - Stupid U.K Gov't (To$$ers)
An outstanding and highly detailed presentation. One very minor point: The F-102 is known as the Delta Dagger, not Delta Dart, which belongs to the F-106.
1) Interesting mention of the TDR-1 attack drone. Most people have never heard of it. I only have because my father built them.
2) Mugu Rock (pronounced Magoo) near the naval air base is famous for new car comercials. If you have seen a car driving along a highway on the coast with a massive monolith jutting out into the sea, that's Mugu Rock. Because many people have had to be rescued, climbing it is forbidden. That didn't stop me from doing so as a teenager.
3) I remember as a kid seeing the ready alert shelters, with F-106s in them, at the end of the runway at Oxnard AFB, which is now Camarillo Airport.
Great comment! What did your father do on the TDR-1? It was a remarkable piece of technology for the time.
@@notapound
I really don't know. He left my mother when I was two. I only learned about it from older siblings after he died. I know that he was a machinist. Incidentally, my mother worked for Consolidated Aircraft making Catalinas and Coronados. Again, I don't know exactly what she did, other than piss off the management by trying to unionize. They both passed long ago.
There was another event in the late 1950s that exposed a gaping flaw in the US military's preferred fighter aircraft, when they were put to the test against surrogates of the Warsaw Pact's most numerous fighters. During Project Feather Duster, the F-100 Super Sabre, F-102 Delta Dagger, F-104 Starfighter, F-105 Thunderchief, and the newly-introduced F-4 Phantom II were pitted against what were judged to be the most similar aircraft in the US inventory to the Mig-17 Fresco and Mig-21 Fishbed; the F-86H Sabre and the F-5.
The F-86H and F-5 took all the other aircraft to the woodshed.
The outcome of Feather Duster was quickly and quietly walked-away from, systemically un-learned, and seldom mentioned again by the establishment --- despite the fact that it foresaged how poorly the US military's new fighters would fare against the Mig-17 and Mig-21 in the Vietnam War, which was only a few years away. In 1972, all US aircraft of all types achieved only 34 kills against VPAF fighters, while VPAF Mig-21s shot-down 54 US aircraft (not even including VPAF Mig-19s and Mig-17s, which also achieved another 4 victories between them, despite both the Mig-17 and Mig-19 being armed only with guns in VPAF service). By the time the competence of active VPAF pilots had overtaken the maximum possible competence of US pilots (VPAF pilots fought all tours of duty as pilots, while US pilots were forced to take a desk job every other tour, causing the skills of US pilots to atrophy from a lack of regular practice), US airpower operating within range of Migs was in big trouble.
(Gee, how could we POSSIBLY have seen it coming?)
Thanks for this. As it happens I am about 3 weeks out from that video. The full report was declassified a few years back and makes very interesting reading. Only the F-104 performed well in that exercise, partially due to the formations that those squadrons typically flew.
In any case. Great and interesting comment. Very useful and appreciate you taking the time.
But muh shopwork!
Apples and apricots comparison. Fail to consider US ROE limitations on its' fighters and lump in 'all other types of aircraft' vs. VPAF fighters which is unfair. Compare VpAF fighters vs. US planes configured and operating as fighters for a better figure.
Remarkable that a unmanned piston fighter from WW2 managed to evade modern jet fighters.Doesn't say much for the pilots.
Agreed - it is an interesting one. I’m willing to give the pilots the benefit of the doubt in this instance as the E-6 fire control system was incredibly rigid in how it could engage targets. Despite this, the back up was shooting a notoriously inaccurate weapon with a very specific point of convergence over open sights…
Their FFARs were little better than pebbles from slingshots as far as target-hitting goes. No "evasion" was necessary when you are such a small target. Just sayin."
As a pilot ..you have to ensure the safety of YOUR aircraft at all times.. The topbrass don't tend to like multi million pound aircraft dented .. Hell even today a pilot can face a court martial and loose his wings for even the slightest thing that puts the aircraft at risk .. The pilots where following orders and acting professionally .. not "hotdogging" the Hellcat could still do a hell of a lot of damage to the Scorpion if they get it wrong ..
Not really the pilots' fault. They were trained, and flew an aircraft designed, for a very narrowly defined mission (Ground Controlled Intercept of Soviet heavy bombers) and the Hellcat was entirely out of that window.
Interestingly, in 1963 the RAF did an experiment at RAF Binbrook specifically pitting their new shiny EE Lightnings against some old Spitfires. The Lightnings really struggled as the Spitfires were so much slower and were a very poor target for the IR missiles. They did the trial because of the Indonesian confrontation, and Indonesian Air Force had large numbers of P-51 Mustangs.
Back in the early '80's I was on a Knox Class Frigate and we had to do qualifications before going on WESTPAC. We performed our NGFS at San Clemente Island then steamed north to be about 40 miles off Point Mugu for a missile(BPDSMS) shoot. We had two inert(complete but with a dummy warhead) AIM-7 Sparrows we had taken on and loaded in Seal Beach and were ready. We were prepped by the Point Mugu staff on how we were to follow protocol when firing the missiles. Radar to illuminate, search, track, then fire the bird when instructed, THEN stop illuminating when ordered to make the Sparrow go ballistic and miss the drone. Following the protocol we fired the first Sparrow....turned off the illumination radar when instructed but had the Sparrow, while ballistic, kill the Firebee drone. The Point Mugu people were not happy with the drone being hit and tried to say that we left the radar on too long. However, the range telemetry showed different. The target drone was not illuminated for 1 second before the hit. About 3 hours later, and with a new Firebee on line, we did the second shoot. Same outcome..... This time range telemetry showed the Sparrow was ballistic for over 2.5 seconds before hitting the drone. Point Mugu people were really upset now and tried to invalidate the tests. My Captain told them that maybe they should have informed the Firebee pilot to take evasive action when the radar stopped illuminating the drone. Big stink that lasted almost 2 weeks. After a full examination of the "protocol" used, the protocol was updated, including having the drone pilot evade the incoming missile. We put another "hash mark" under our gold "E" on the launcher sides a few days later......
I became aware of this "battle" actually shortly after I had moved to Los Angeles 27 years ago. I knew that there were some serious wildfires started by all those rockets falling in a large area on the ground, but I don't recall that there were any cars and trucks damaged by this...
Hey - thanks for the comment! I only had a couple of news articles to go on to be honest, so it’s certainly possible they dramatised that part of events. The reporting at the time was that the Kempton’s station wagon was quite badly damaged - smashed windows and shrapnel damage to the body. A truck belonging to some linemen was hit in the engine block by a rocket that didn’t detonate. Sadly I couldn’t find any photographic evidence for these events, so they may well be lost to history/ folklore!
“The fiendish evasive maneuver of a slight turn” Han Solo was flaying then.
I read about it in an article some years ago. The ending sentence is, *"there was red menace that day. But it wasn't the Soviets"*
Dude, what a great new channel you have!
Wow! Absolutely outstanding video! I can tell you enjoyed researching the topic (and I love the attitude and dry wit!) Subscribed. PS - Nice roast of the Falcon missile.
Very good story telling. A recap of what would have been top notch news to me as a teen.
Great video! Not that you'll ever mention it in a video again, but the locals pronounce it like Point "Ma-GOO", with an emphasis on the last syllable. (Just in case you ever decide to visit.)😊 Also, great stock footage of Wilshire Blvd. Many of those buildings are still there as of my last visit.
Cali desert always a source of mystery and adventure . Use to camp out up around Palmdale, El Mirae...back in t day.
BRAVO ZULU!!, A great brief. 👍 entertaining and humorous, too. First I ever heard of this event 😱💥😱💥.. Talk about FUBAR!!. Can you imagine the blow up over this, if it happened today. Social media cell phones, etc😒🤣🤣.. a total 💩 storm to be sure.
Reminds me of the episode of the Simpsons when two jet fighter pilots had to get out and walk to intercept the weight flyer
In 1956 the California Air National Guard had F86A Sabrejets standing on alert in support of Air Defense Command at Van Nuys and Ontario. The Sabre's guns and Korean war proven gunsight could have made quick work of the errant drone. Mission planning starts on the ground. Choosing the right weapon system for the task is part of it.
Epic story about Point Mugu Naval Air Station and Camarillo Air Force Base. Adjacent to Point Mugu’s runway is Missile Park where you can see many missiles tested offshore on the test range. My favorite is the Loon which was an improved copy of the German V-1 cruise missile!
I grew up near Palmdale, but never heard this story. Thanks for posting.
New subscriber - fascinating! I've already watched the Aussie Taylorcraft episode - never knew of that incident, almost comical in how it played out.
As to your comment about the Black Widow being one of the first to carry airborne radar for night fighting, it's not quite correct with all due respect. The Black Widow first took to the skies in 1942, but wasn't introduced operationally till 1944. Airborne radar was first introduced in 1940 on the Bristol Blenheim (bit of a stopgap) and in the same year the Bristol Beaufighter - followed by the Mosquito night fighter in January 1942. You also say the Black Widow had the highest kill ratio of any aircraft used in the war - where did you get this fact from may I ask? The best Kill Ratio in the war was the Brewster Buffalo in Finnish service with 32: 1 ! Regards
Don't forget the various Luftwaffe Me-110 and Ju-88 nightfighter mods.
Great video...
absolutely classic.
BTW... Point Mugu sounds like Point M'Goo
Thanks! I did wonder how to pronounce it… and should have researched it!
@@notapound Tiny nit in a well done video.
Lots of challenging names in the US -
next door to Point Mugu is Port Hueneme...
pronounced: Why-nee-mee.
Yes, great thinking. Fire 104 rockets, and 1 hits the target. What happens to the other 103?
Ah, that's somebody else's problem.
Very funny and informative throughly enjoyed this video 👍
Great video. TY
With the advent of the A-bomb, jets, rockets, and rapid advances in electronics, there was a lot of "new" to digest in the postwar years. Figuring out what was needed and how to do it burned a lot of taxpayer dollars, destroyed a lot of equipment, and sacrificed some lives. But that's how you make progress- fail rapidly to learn quickly.
Wow! That incident certainly flew under my historical radar screen! I wonder how much, if any, compensation was given to those who were damaged by that rogue plane incident!
G'day,
Loved it.
As with the Battle Of Sydney, I had heard about this, but not in such detail.
Already sub'd after viewing
"...Sydney".
Have a good one...
Stay safe.
;-p
Ciao !
billy big bollocks Hellcat vs the pinnacle of US airforce tech at the time .. I was rooting for the Hellcat the whole time .. Shame something of the Hellcat wasn't recovered and displayed somewhere .. Quite the story .
What a fascinating story and well presented.
"...It was also using that fiendish evasive maneuver, the gentle turn." Heh😂
Awesome video, thank you.
I’m very glad you enjoyed it!
What no F-86? 6x.50 cals would have done in the Hellcat easy and not blown up the highway with misses.
Air Force General Burford Nuisance said: "We won't EVER dogfight the enemy again. It's all done with rockets."
There might not have been any 86's at Oxnard AFB to scramble. By this time, the Air Force was shifting over to 20mm cannon and phasing out the 50 cal for aircraft use. While the venerable Ma Deuce was good enough to down the smaller bombers of WW2, they were considered inadequate to take down a modern high speed jet bomber. The amount of time a fighter could keep his guns on a jet bomber was too short to get enough 50 cal rounds on target to do sufficient damage.
@@miket2120 The "Paint Scratcher" syndrome.
@@miket2120 Even the then-standard 4x20mm was deemed marginal. That was one of the big drives behind development of the M61 Vulcan, to allow enough volume of fire in the tiny firing window that jet-age combat offered.
I'm SO glad I subscribed. I haven't laughed this hard in a long time. Just glad nobody got killed. Cheers, mate. BTW, I was five months old when this "battle" occurred.
Reminded of what I was told about an air-to-air missile introduced to (or inflicted on?) the USAF in the early 1960s. The manufacturers claimed it to be '98% reliable'. Its actual performance proved to be absolutely abysmal.
The '98% reliable' claim REALLY meant that, when fired, the missile would properly detach from the aircraft 98% of the time. Whether or not its engine would fire as intended, or whether it would hit the intended target, these were things that did NOT factor into that reliability claim.
Outstanding video
I love the voice and accent. You sound like Vox of Borg. 🖖 I've just liked and subscribed
Thank you :)
@@notapound seriously, your content is excellent and you're fantastic! I look forward to more videos from you.
That plane was such a reach technological that I’m amazed the Air Force was ever able to get their arm to pop back into their shoulder.
The very idea that you could get a plane armed only with rockets be an effective interceptor is hilarious. Particularly with having to place the rockets as far from the centerline as possible, because you know the FFARs will go out in a utterly random cone. They should have just taken the German MK103 cannons from WW2 and engineered them into a more effective weapon.
The F4 Phantom had to have a gun pod added because it was designed with that rocket idea.
The UK and France did almost exactly that - the ADEN and DEFA 30mm revolver cannons were based heavily on the experimental German MG213. They were very effective, fitted to several generations of jet fighters in both countries. The UK toyed with 2-inch calibre rockets in the air-to-air role, notably on the DH Sea Vixen, but they weren't particularly successful.
Well, that might be hindsight. When the scorpion was designed, guided air-to-air missiles didn't exist. Guns on Soviet bombers were savage. They were flying Tu-4s (B-29 ripoffs) and TU-95 Bears. So, you ask your aircraft to fly into that mess with .50 cals (the USA had not switched to cannons yet.) Attempting to down these bombers with .50 cal weapons would have been... hazardous. So something new was needed, immediately. Guided missiles weren't ready, there's no acceptable 20mm cannon (and would still have an shorter range than the defensive gunners), and .50 cals are unsuitable.
So what's left?
@@tonyennis1787worst part is; the TU-4 didn’t have .50’s, it had **23mms!**
@@tonyennis1787Well, they could have used heavier cannons. Such a large aircraft could have supported 25mm cannons with higher velocities. It would have been a better investment of R&D effort than the rockets.
Can you think of a way of explaining to your commander why you didn't kill it? Now imagine an explanation so clever that as it moved up the chain of command it became so brilliant that eventually we sent the F-4 Phantom to Vietnam without guns or functional rockets.
Informative and entertaining -
Unreal….
Smh…
Cool vid mate.
😎👍
Great story - excellent reporting!
Great story that not mnay have heard of. Thanks.
The F-89 was one of the most advanced jets of its day but arguably also one of the worst. At least the earlier models.
It pushed the limits of avionics and weapon systems beyond their realistic limits. The sad thing is the experience didn’t cause people to challenge the direction of US air-to-air doctrine until it was too latex
That Einstein chap had many talents.
He even knobbed Norma.
Couldn’t hit a barn door with this type of rocket though.
Well researched. Well told.
Had to check this out after watching your piece about the F-89, I now want Revell to bring this out as a Dog - Fight Double!
As a side note the "flying to slowly" excuse was also used by the Italiam A/A gunners (firing at Swordfish biplanes) after the Taranto raid in 1940.....
My friend's grandfather worked out at mugu in the 50s on the sparrow one missile. I saw his old yearbook from point mugu there were dozens of target hell cats there.
We studied this incident in the USAF nuclear weapons school during the block on the AIR-2A Genie. Basically: "Why do we need the Genie?" The Mighty Mouse rocket always seemed to me to be a ludicrous solution to a problem.
Debriefing of the Scorpions crews : "We gonna need a bigger rocket"
Probably best to attack an aircraft with its own style of weapons. Sometimes you do need a knife for a gunfight. Great presentation. Your dry British wit is spot on.
"Using the fiendesh evasive maneuver of a gentle turn" lmao
Fun fact, the (now ancient) idea to put a guidance kit on the FFAR (now evolved and upgraded to the Hydra 70mm, or in Canadian service the CRV7), has reached some manner of success.
This means that it is feasible that a modern anti-aircraft 70mm rocket based weapon could be designed that has an infrared seeker on it, which would likely be of great interest to such fighters as the F-22 and F-35, which have extremely cramped internal weapons bays.
Guidance and kill probability might be lower, but this would be more effective against large numbers of targets, since even the F-35 can only (stealthily) carry 2 AIM-9X missiles in it's two secondary internal weapons bays.
Due to the smaller diameter of the 70mm class rockets, it would be feasible to carry more of them in the same size weapons bay than the AIM-9X, and with enough development they might even get to being just as deadly, if not as long ranged (however the current Hydra 70 is no slouch, and the CRV7 is even faster).
However in the realm of the known, there are these current programs in existence:
BAE Systems APKWS, Advanced Precision-Kill Weapons System (a laser guidance kit for the Hydra 70). Currently in series production and being supplied in quantity to Ukraine.
US Navy / Office of Naval Research LOGIR, LOw-cost Guided Imaging Rocket, this does not need an active laser designation, instead it uses Imaging Infrared in the terminal phase of flight to guide to target, making it truly Fire and Forget. South Korea uses this one for coastal defense against North Korean small boats, mounted as 2x 18 round containers in a turret on a 6x6 armored vehicle.
Lockheed Martin DAGR, Direct Attack Guided Rocket, a 70mm class rocket designed to be compatible with existing Hellfire II missile guidance systems, and when replacing such missiles, offers up to 4 times as many shots for the same number of hard points or pylons occupied.
Orbital-ATK and Elbit Systems are cooperating to develop the GATR-L, Guided Advanced Tactical Rocket - Laser, another laser-guided version of the Hydra.
Raytheon is developing the TALON, however I can not find any information on it from a quick search.
Thales is developing the FZ275 LGR, which is another laser-guided 70mm class rocket, however it is still in testing as of 2017.
Nice, bro!
An .."un-guided NUCLEAR rocket "???- gee, what could possibly go wrong ?? LOL
Priceless...
how many more incident like this happened and have never surfaced
It does make you wonder, doesn’t it!
A really good story is the F-102 that went out of control and then landed by itself after the pilot bailed out.
Considering the F-89 Scorpion was firing unguided rockets I am not surprised this happened. Using unguided rockets in a air to air role was increadibly stupid.
Yes but the rockets AS STATED IN THE VIDEO ..where designed to shoot down Soviet BOMBERS flying like this drone relatively straight and level.. The main factor with this is that the targeting rader wasn't able to get a solution for the rockets and the slow moving Hellcat drone .. .. if it could then the rockets would have been effective... Also WHAT ELSE COULD THEY HAVE USED ..THEY HAD f*CK ALL ELSE ON THE AIRCRAFT..... HARSH WORDS MAYBE? .. OR GIVE THE HELLCAT THE BIRDY .. SHEESH
There wasn't really a viable alternative at the time. Guided missiles just didn't work (read up on the AIM-4 Falcon debacle) and guns were deemed ineffective against heavy bombers at high-subsonic speeds. The rockets were a stopgap until the M61 Vulcan and functioning missiles were introduced. They only lasted about a decade in service.
@@alun7006 Yet the F-86 D saber was armed with four 20mm cannons. So yes lets arm a fighter with unguided rockets. which could not hit anything in the air. No it was never a viable option.
@@thunberbolttwo3953 no, the F-86D was rocket armed. The export K/L versions had cannons.
@@alun7006 Looks like I was wrong. Using unguided rockets was pointless though. You would never hit anything with them.
Subbed👍👍
Interesting story
"F-102 Delta Dart" No, the Dart is the F-106. The F-102 was the Delta Dagger.
Sorry - slip of the tongue in narration!
1st of your videos. Liked and Subscribed.
And those AirForce fighters were supposed to shoot down soviet bombers.
SIGH .. Google is your friend ..Help yourself and maybe LEARN something ..Try comparing the size and performance specs of the HELLCAT vs a TU16 Badger / TU22 Blinder soviet bombers and there you will find your answer ... to help you .. the Radar on the Scorpion wasn't designed for old WW2 piston engined aircraft was it? ..... and a TU16 Badger is NOT an "old ww2 piston engined fighter" is it ??, nor is the Blinder ..
They'd have had a much better time of it against a Badger or Bear. Three times faster, ten times bigger. That's what the F-89 was designed for.
Really enjoying all of your videos. Only discovered a few days ago and I've watched nearly all of them. I've got an observation/suggestion- your editing cuts your narration so close between sentences that I sometime don't have enough time to digest a piece of information before the next bit of information is coming on. There are very few pauses. I'm guessing that you're intentionally editing tightly to keep the pacing quick and engaging, but my opinion is that you could slow it down some and still keep folks engaged. I would guess that the average person that decides to settle into a 20 minute video about an obscure bit of aviation history is inherently patient and inquisitive. And leaving a bit more dead space in the narration would result in slightly longer videos, which probably doesn't hurt from the youtube algorithm perspective. Not a criticism as I think these videos are fantastic, just offering an unsolicited opinion that you're welcome to disregard entirely. Keep making cool vids about cool planes.
Thanks for the comment. You're right about the pacing - still 'tuning it' as it were. Really glad you're enjoying the videos! Many more to come :)
Gotta love those 50's airplane designs 14:14
So , in the end, the plucky little Hellcat fell on its sword, and refused to "be taken prisoner" , choosing an honorable end. Hope this lesson taught in future military training - overconfidence in abilities.
Strange that a simular situation occurred in Australia. Where a pilot less fixed upper mounted wing aircraft simular to the Piper Club, with a 120 mph top speed took off after the pilot hand spun the propeller. The engine roared into action in a highly unexpected manner, the pilot realized the plane suddenly surged forward and he tried to hold it by the wing struts but it ran away down the runway and claimed into the sky.
Good stuff.