C-2 Final Flights

///AMG said:
I think it is a safety issue for the C-2. They had one production run, a billion years ago (ok maybe the last rolled off the line in the early 80’s?). Unlike the E-2 which has had several variants. Even the outgoing E-2C is a lot newer, not to mention the brand new production E-2D’s replacing them. What you say about landing is true in part. They are without a doubt, more challenging, but that is mostly because the margin for error is way smaller with such a long wingspan. There have historically been other jets with similar issues, namely the Tomcat, Skywarrior, and I imagine to a lesser extent, the Vigi. I personally was witness to an E-2 that had a long bolter, drifted right, and struck the tails of 5 different Super Hornets and Growlers parked on the bow. It lost nearly half its right wing, and diverted to a place in the Middle East. That was wild. Grumman built tough airplanes. But a testament to how little slop those guys have. That being said, they also have turboprops with instantaneous power (no spool lag like we have in jets), and they fly approach at like 100 knots. So there are parts that are hard, and there other parts that are much easier. But they sure used the rudder a whole lot more than we did on approach, so there is that. And they didn’t have FBW controls like we do. I’m sure that the F/A-18 and F-35 are the easiest planes to land on a carrier in history. That doesn’t make it always “easy”, but relatively speaking, our friends in Prowlers and Hawkeyes probably get the award for busiest hands/working the hardest in modern times. God knows what those old guys dealt with in much less aerodynamically friendly airplanes in generations past. I think the C-2 was a little easier, since it didn’t have the weird aerodynamics of the dome. But they still had the size constraints.
Click to expand...

Last batch of 39 R’s were produced 1984-1990, still pretty old airframes.
 
Pilot Fighter said:
Last batch of 39 R’s were produced 1984-1990, still pretty old airframes.
Click to expand...

Is the R the COD? Yeah that checks out with my vague idea of when they stopped production. Those things were dumps on the inside. Like important fluids dripping from the ceiling. They were literal death traps for anyone in the back. Even in the 80’s
 
///AMG said:
Is the R the COD? Yeah that checks out with my vague idea of when they stopped production. Those things were dumps on the inside. Like important fluids dripping from the ceiling. They were literal death traps for anyone in the back. Even in the 80’s
Click to expand...

C-2A(R) - odd designation, replaced the C-2A. I think the designation was some DOD budget trickery.

I always felt they should open the rear hatch for take-offs and landings with pax in back.

My father watched one go in after launching off the Ranger in 1970. Crash footage is online. I think they concluded that load shifted. My father almost captured the accident as he was filming on deck with his new super 8 movie camera. When it pitched up, he stopped recording.

We lost much of his photo archive due to improper storage.
 
Pilot Fighter said:
C-2A(R) - odd designation, replaced the C-2A. I think the designation was some DOD budget trickery.

I always felt they should open the rear hatch for take-offs and landings with pax in back.

My father watched one go in after launching off the Ranger in 1970. Crash footage is online. I think they concluded that load shifted. My father almost captured the accident as he was filming on deck with his new super 8 movie camera. When it pitched up, he stopped recording.

We lost much of his photo archive due to improper storage.
Click to expand...

Yeah I have seen a video of that for sure. • like that is terrifying. I can think of that one, the Caribou, and then the National 747 in (?) Kandahar. Horrible to watch
 
///AMG said:
Yeah I have seen a video of that for sure. • like that is terrifying. I can think of that one, the Caribou, and then the National 747 in (?) Kandahar. Horrible to watch
Click to expand...
Most folks here won't get the Caribou reference. I'm aware of exactly what you're talking about, but I actually know what a Caribou is and used to build parts for them way back in the olden times, these influencers on this site have no idea regarding the shoulders they're standing on. It's okay to be dumb as long as you don't hurt anyone.
 
knot4u said:
Most folks here won't get the Caribou reference. I'm aware of exactly what you're talking about, but I actually know what a Caribou is and used to build parts for them way back in the olden times, these influencers on this site have no idea regarding the shoulders they're standing on. It's okay to be dumb as long as you don't hurt anyone.
Click to expand...

I do love a nice caribou. DHC just built such cool airplanes once upon a time. What were you building for them?
 
///AMG said:
I do love a nice caribou. DHC just built such cool airplanes once upon a time. What were you building for them?
Click to expand...
Propeller controls. I never built a prop but I've changed a few. I was amidst the end of the radial engine still being used for commercial purposes. I have stories that most here would either consider BS or boring so I keep them to myself. It's been a ride. I might have farted around with Buffalo and OV-10 stuff too, it's all just a blur anymore.
 
knot4u said:
Propeller controls. I never built a prop but I've changed a few. I was amidst the end of the radial engine still being used for commercial purposes. I have stories that most here would either consider BS or boring so I keep them to myself. It's been a ride. I might have farted around with Buffalo and OV-10 stuff too, it's all just a blur anymore.
Click to expand...

When the Navy parked its last recips, Navy flying clubs started to dry up, literally.
 

Attachments

  • Fokker_F27_Friendship_US_Army_Golden_Knight.jpg
    Fokker_F27_Friendship_US_Army_Golden_Knight.jpg
    37.4 KB · Views: 0
Wardogg said:
How are they going to get the mail on the boat now?
Click to expand...
That’s the job of the bull ensign to task the newest butterbar ensign onboard with the mail buoy watch to make sure everyone’s Amazon packages get delivered on time.
That was a fun mess with the new ensign straight from ROTC/Naval Academy routine for the crew.

Re; E-7 vs E-2. Granted things have changed in the 25 years since I needed to rely on an E-2C and an E-3 to keep my SA on the battlespace.
I much preferred an E-3 over an E-2 if I had one available. I don’t particularly agree with cancellation of the E-7 to prioritize the E-2D taking over ABM. I mean it’s still just 3 guys in back even with upgraded avionics and new data systems. Versus a larger crew with more capabilities in a E-3 and E-7. I just don’t see how an E-2D would take over the role of an E-3.

I remember my first time on an aircraft carrier - the • Kitty - underway, I came aboard by trapping on a C-2 COD flight. Many memories, and then left via cat shot off the bow on a C-2. Was sad watching the monthly YouTube videos of Kitty getting dismantled over the course of a year.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top