Jump to content

First EA-18G Growler out of the paint barn!


Recommended Posts

I've flown with that guy!

In the Hawkeye world we have (stick) Monkeys and Moles (because they work in a tunnel with the lights out). And a few designated as "stunt" Moles for FCF's, FCLP's and CQ.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I've flown with that guy!

In the Hawkeye world we have (stick) Monkeys and Moles (because they work in a tunnel with the lights out). And a few designated as "stunt" Moles for FCF's, FCLP's and CQ.

VAW-123 actually had an NFO with the callsign Trunk Monkey, after the commercials. I thought it was pretty funny.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive always wondered if what Ive heard about pilot call signs is true.

Ive heard that the pilot doesnt have a choice in his call sign, that its "assigned" to him by his fellow pilots.

Is this true?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it's true. It'd have to be given to the pilot, cause I doubt many of the pilots would choose the call sign they end up with. Most call signs are a play on the pilots real name or to remember a note worthy event that the pilot would rather have forgotten.

I'm sure our fellow ARC pilots can add more to this. Also, there has been posts on this before that you can search for.

HTH,

Rodney

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ive heard that the pilot doesnt have a choice in his call sign

A prize understatement.

And the more one attempts to assert a choice, the less flattering the callsign will be and the more it will stick.

That's how my squadron ended up with a "Fluffer." (Yes, THIS kind of Fluffer)

Link to post
Share on other sites
man, with all the previous talk on what a growler is, I actually thought "What the hell is a wolf head doing on the nose?" when I saw the pics. Good example of intended meaning and percieved meaning differences

If that's a polite way of saying "how out of touch big navy is with reality", then I agree :blink:

Link to post
Share on other sites
If that's a polite way of saying "how out of touch big navy is with reality", then I agree :D

yeah, who didn't see the double meaning problem coming a mile away? :cheers: I can understand not naming it the Shocker for the same reasons, but a growling wolf is far from the first thing most people think of when they hear the name "Growler."

Link to post
Share on other sites
If that's a polite way of saying "how out of touch big navy is with reality", then I agree :)

I thought "Growler" was a Navy term?

My CO in boot-camp was the first person I had heard use the expression...

Most call signs are a play on the pilots real name or to remember a note worthy event that the pilot would rather have forgotten.
Play on the pilot's name or noteworthy event? :D

post-15-1128285347.jpg

:cheers:

Edited by Zactoman
Link to post
Share on other sites
I thought "Growler" was a Navy term?

I could of course be mistaken (so many euphamisms for throwing a brick off the back porch that it's hard to keep all their entymologies straight), but I'm pretty sure I was using "Growler" as a synonym for the ol' cornback rattler long before I was in the nav....

Edited by Karl Sander
Link to post
Share on other sites
yeah, who didn't see the double meaning problem coming a mile away? :cheers: I can understand not naming it the Shocker for the same reasons, but a growling wolf is far from the first thing most people think of when they hear the name "Growler."

Pssshaw. Much better to be named for a varsity demonstration of deviance than my morning ritual (which, incidentally, is PARTICULARY foul after eating garlic fries at last night's football game).

Link to post
Share on other sites
Pssshaw. Much better to be named for a varsity demonstration of deviance than my morning ritual (which, incidentally, is PARTICULARY foul after eating garlic fries at last night's football game).

TMI.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey Joe (where you goin' with that gun in your hand? :D )

You say that the current crop of "Gs" are acutally "Fs". Will the general airframe of a G differ from an F?

Chappie

The first 2 development airplanes, EA-1 and 2, were procured under the current contract and were converted from "F" airframes. Capability-wise they are "G"s but for bookkeeping purposes they're still officially "F"s.

Production G airplanes, as I understand things, theoretically will be able to be converted to "F" models if necessary, and "F" jets from the same lots would be theoretically able to be converted to "G"s so I'd say, no there are no significant structural differences between the "F" and "G" when the real "G"s come out. The "G" wing pylons are different internally from the "E/F" pylons due to the interface for the ALQ-99 pods, so a standard SUU-79B/A is incompatible with the "G" but the "G"s SUU-79C/A should be compatible with a normal "E/F" jet that can accept the SUU-79B/A.

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...