Jump to content

Navy A-12 CB (Carrier Based) Squadron


Recommended Posts

Imagine Kelly Johnson had been able to sell the Navy his proposal to equip an A-12 with a tailhook and JATO bottles to launch and recover it from a carrier...what 1960-1968 Navy squadron do you think this bird would have been assigned to? I've done a few hours research and found two possibles:

- VQ-1/ VQ-2 with the EA-3B Skywarrior / Electronic Reconnaissance Squadron

- RVAH-11 with the RA-5C Vigilante / Heavy Reconnaissance Squadron

Barring the plausibility of the Blackbird actually making it off the flight deck, what do you think? Use your imagination since it's a what-if scenario...

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would look nifty with the VAQ-2 "Sandeman" spook.

Making it off the flight deck would be the least of my worries - putting it back on in one piece would rank pretty high on my list. ;)

Cheers,

Andre

Link to post
Share on other sites

These are good points! The Blackbird airframe likely would have had trouble with the landings, most notably at the 715 joint. I'm not sure what the benefit would have been to launch these at sea...the roadrunners were not yet at Kadena, so CIA missions were coming out of Groom until roughly 1967. I'm sure the Navy had similar concerns, not to mention their own pet programs in the pipeline.

In my opinion, this was the Skunkworks attempt to sell the Navy a "common market" R-12(later the SR-71)airframe that could be configured as a bomber/interceptor/reconnaissance platform. There are few documents I've found describing the carrier version, and only a rough mechanical drawing for visual placement of the JATO bottles and hook. Eventually, the unofficial story is Johnson avoided Navy contracts, saying they had no idea what they really wanted.

Anyway, I have one Kiwi Resin 1:48 A-12 conversion kit and I'm going to build the A-12CB as I think it might have been, using the catapult harness system the Vigi's used. I'm leaning toward the RVAH-5 USS Kittyhawk markings. Thanks for the replies and if anyone has anymore input, by all means let's hear it...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Would it fit on the ship's elevators? That was a long fuselage.

Probably yet another reason the Navy declined. The A-12 was approximately 100' long...I wish there was more documentation on the proposal. There probably is, somewhere.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Could it carry Jolly Rogers markings?

That would definitely look very cool! I wonder if the fighter pilots would have accepted the guys in the space-suits?

When the Air Force Habu began their detachments in the late 60's, they were not well received by the fighter jocks, nor anyone else for that matter...even the U-2 crews had it out for them! They blamed it on their orange bag suits, but they were likely a bit more arrogant and aloof too, using their mega-classified status as a rebuff. :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

A few U-2 operated from aicraft carriers.

In 1963, the CIA started project Whale Tale to develop carrier-based U-2Gs to overcome range limitations. During development of the capability, CIA pilots took off and landed U-2Gs on the aircraft carrier USS Ranger and other ships. The U-2G was used only twice operationally. Both flights occurred from USS Ranger in May 1964 to observe France's development of an atomic bomb test range at Moruroa in French Polynesia (Wikipedia U-2 article).
Edited by cafe
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...

My first thought was that this was one of the most absurd proposals I've ever heard of. A hundred-foot-long aircraft on a carrier deck? How would they even turn it round? And what was the A-12's landing speed? Plus, as Pirata points out, it would never fit on the lifts.

However ...

It's just about possible to see it in the same light as the U-2 or the C-130 (or the P-2, or even the B-25) "operating" from a flight deck. It's not a carrier-borne aircraft; it's a carrier-ferried aircraft. You use a crane to drop one onto the deck, you sail to wherever you need to launch from, you take off*, you fly the mission; and - crucially - you land somewhere else. It might just about have been workable like that. (Though even that leaves two unanswered questions: why fit an arrestor hook, and what's the need when an A-12 could get anywhere it needed to from the available land bases?)

If this had been the operating method, I doubt there would have been a permanently-established A-12 squadron. It's possible that one might occasionally have been attached to one of the Navy's reconnaissance squadrons (more likely than the VAQ EW squadrons). But I suspect it would probably have been the Navy being asked to lug a USAF aircraft around, and complaining bitterly about it non-stop until they watched the bloody thing fall off the end of the deck.

* easy! no, really!

Edited by pigsty
Link to post
Share on other sites

With the airframe so long, I think the nose wheel would hang off the deck after a successful 3 Wire Trap ...

The aircraft's tendency to leak fuel while on the ground would have made it a disaster waiting to happen on a carrier :doh:/>/>

Well, they did have Tomcats flying off them all those years so would leaking be that big a deal ? :whistle:

-Gregg

Link to post
Share on other sites

The aircraft's tendency to leak fuel while on the ground would have made it a disaster waiting to happen on a carrier :doh:/>/>

Then again, you could drop a lit cigarette in a bucket of JP-7, and it will go out.

Cheers,

Andre

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...