US Army Aircraft Since 1947

147 Pages·1990·105.94 MB·English

by  Stephen Harding

STEPHEN HARDING
SINCE1947
-
SINCE 1947
An Illustrated Directory
by
STEPHEN HARDING
speOialbYrn[Pl~~~
Contents
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This bookis dedicatedto INTRODUCTION
Mary, Sarah andIan
AUTHOR'S NOTE
AIRCRAFTPROFILES,ALPHABETICALLY LISTED
AeroDesignandEngineeringU-9AeroCommander 1
AeroncaL-16 3
AmericanHelicopterH-26 5
AvroCanadaVZ-9 7
BeechC-45Expediter 9
BeechU-8Seminole 12
BeechT-42Cochise 17
BeechU-21 Ute 19
BeechC-12Huron 24
BeechT-34Mentor 27
BellH-13Sioux 29
Copyright©1990byStephenHarding BellV-3 33
BellH-15 35
Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthisworkmaybereproducedorusedinany BellH-4 37
form byanymeans- graphic,electronic,ormechanical,including BellH-l Iroquois 39
photocopying,recording,taping,oranyinformationstorageandretrieval BellSK-5 45
system- withoutwrittenpermissionofthepublisher. BellAH-l Cobra 47
BellH-58Kiowa 53
PrintedinEnglandbyLiveseyLtd. BellH-63 57
9091 92939454321 Be11V-15 59
BellD292ACAP 61
ISBN0-933424-53-1
BoeingL-15Scout 63
Boeing-VertolH-47Chinook 65
FirstpublishedintheUnitedKingdomin1990by BrantlyHO-3 73
AirlifePublishingLtd. Boeing-VertolH-61 71
CessnaU-20 75
PublishedintheUnitedStatesin1990by Cessna0-1 BirdDog 77
SpecialtyPress,Inc. CessnaT-37 81
P.O. Box338 CessnaH-41 Seneca 83
123NorthSecondStreet CessnaU-3 85
Stillwater,MN55082U.S.A. CessnaT-41 Mescalero 87
InMinn612-430-2210 ChryslerVZ-6 89
Toll-free800-888-9653 Consolidated-VulteeL-13 91
Curtiss-WrightVZ-7 93
BooktradedistributionbyVoyageurPress,Inc. Curtiss-WrightModel2500 95
DeHavillandU-6Beaver 97
SpecialtyPressbooksarealsoavailableatdiscountsforquantitiesfor DeHavillandU-l Otter 99
educational,fundraising,premium,orsales-promotionuse.Fordetails DeHavillandC-7Caribou 101
contactthemarketingmanager.Pleasewriteorcallforourfreecatalogof DeHavillandV-7Buffalo 104
publications. DeHavillandV-18 106
r
I
I
SikorskyH-3SeaKing 240
DeLacknerHZ-1 108 SikorskyH-54Tarhe 242
DoakVZ-4 110 SikorskyH-59 245
DomanH-31 112 SikorskyH-60Blackhawk 247
DouglasC-47Skytrain 114 SikorskyS-72RSRA 252
DouglasC-54Skymaster 117 SikorskyS-75ACAP 254
DouglasA4DSkyhawk 118 StinsonL-5Sentinel 256
FairchildVZ-5 120 Sud-OuestHO-1 259
FiatG.91 122 VertolH-21 Shawnee 261
FokkerF-27 124 VertolH-16Transporter 263
GrummanV-1 Mohawk 126 VertolVZ-2 265
GrummanGulfstreamIandII 131 VertolHC-1 267
GulfstreamC-20 134
HawkerSiddeleyV-6Kestrel 136
HelioU-10Courier 139 APPENDIX: ARMYAIRCRAFT DESIGNATION
HillerH-23Raven 141 SYSTEMS 269
HillerVZ-1 Pawnee 144
HillerH-32Hornet 146
HillerH-5 148 BIBLIOGRAPHY 272
HughesV-9 150
HughesH-55Osage 152
HughesH-6Cayuse 154
KamanH-2TomahawkandSeasprite 158
LockheedH-51 161
LockheedC-121 163
LockheedV-4Hummingbird 165
Lockheed0-3 167
LockheedP-2Neptune 171
LockheedH-56Cheyenne 174
McCullochH-30 177
McDonnellV-1 179
McDonnell-DouglasH-64Apache 181
MississippiStateUniversity/ParsonsV-11 184
NoorduynC-64Norseman 186
NorthropN-156F 188
NorthAmerican/RyanU-18Navion 190
NorthAmericanT-28Trojan 192
NorthAmerican/CavalierF-51 Mustang 194
PiaseckiH-25ArmyMule 197
PiaseckiVZ-8 199
Piasecki16H-1A 202
PilatusV-20Chiricahua 204
PiperL-4 206
PiperL-18 209
PiperU-7 211
PrincetonUniversityGem 213
RyanVZ-3 215
RyanV-8 218
RyanV-5 220
SeibelH-24 223
ShortsSD3-30 225
SikorskyH-18 227
SikorskyH-19Chickasaw 229
SikorskyH-39 232
SikorskyH-34Choctaw 234
SikorskyH-37Mojave 237
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS INTRODUCTION
The author wishes to thank all the people and organizations In the just over forty years since its creation the air arm of the
listed below for supplying the information, photos, and other modern United States Army has grown from a relatively small
data without which this book would have been far less and ill-equipped liaison and battlefield observation force into a
complete: vast, complex and capable organization employing more than
Peter M. Bowers; Jim Sullivan; Duane Kasulka; William T. 10,000 fixed- and rotary-wing attack, reconnaissance, transport
Larkins; Bob Pickett; Peter Russell-Smith; Roger Besecker; and general utility aircraft. In the course of this transformation
Gordon S. Williams; Georg Fischbach; Peter Mancus; Sharon Army aviation has been called upon to perform a wide range of
Shaw of De Havilland Canada; British Aerospace; Jennifer tasks both at home and around the world, and has participated
Norton of Fairchild Industries; Florence Piazza of Piasecki in two major armed conflicts and a host of what are popularly
Aircraft; Lynn Coakly of Army Aviation magazine; H. Dean known as 'international crises'. These factors, coupled with
Humphrey of Cessna Aircraft; Marilyn Phipps of Boeing; C. E. long-standing governmental restraints placed on the size,
Ruckdaschel of Rockwell International; Holly Moore of the complexity and capabilities of its aircraft, have made the Army
American HelicopterSociety; MessrsW. Odermattand U. Wenger both innovative and inventive in its approach to military
of Pilatus Aircraft; Bruce Goulding of Kaman Aerospace; Ira aviation. As a result, over the past four decades the United
Chart and E. C. Riley of Northrop Corporation; Lois Lovisolo of States Army has acquired and employed a greater variety of
Grumman Corporation; Jack Isabel and Z. Joe Thornton of aircraft types - experimental and operational, mass-purchase
General Dynamics; John Gedraitis of Beechcraft; Don Hanson and 'one-of-a-kind', fixed-wing, rotary-wing and, in afew cases,
and Harry Gann of Douglas Aircraft; Bell Helicopter-Textron; no-winged - than could be found in many larger airforces.
Boeing-Vertol; Hynes Helicopters; Eric Schulzingerof Lockheed This book is not intended to be a comprehensive history of
California; Joseph E. Dabneyof Lockheed-Georgia; Dana Mullady post-World War II Army aviation activities; that fascinating and
of Sikorsky Aircraft; Fokker Aircraft BV; C. Samuel Campagna complex story is deserving of a far more detailed study than
of Short Brothers; McDonnell-Douglas Helicopter Company; could be presented in these pages and has, in fact, been well
Mississippi State University; Princeton University; George told elsewhere*. Still, any directory ofthe manned aircraft used
Welsh of the San Diego Aerospace Museum; Cesare Falessi of by the modern United States Army must include at least a brief
Aeritalia; Frank Colucci of Defence Helicopter World magazine; summary of the events and trends that shaped Army aviation,
Ruth Shephard and Ralph Pritchard ofthe Army Transportation for the type and number of machines operated by the Army
Corps Museum; Thomas J. Sabiston of the Army Aviation from 1947 onward - their development, use and eventual
Museum; MajorAustin R. Omlie ofthe Army Aviation Engineer supplantation by other, more advanced types - was and is
ing Flight Activity; Joseph Avesian oftheArmy Tank-Automotive determined by those events and trends.
Command; Jack Calve, W. Howard DeMere, LTC Thomas Though United StatesArmy aviation can trace its lineage back
Fichter, and LTC Don R. Watson of the Army Aviation Systems tothe Federal balloon companies ofthe American Civil War, and
Command; Betty Goodson of the Army Aviation Center; and though many of its traditions and not afew of its current tactics
Wayne Dzwonchyk and Dr Robert Wright of the U.S. Army were originally developed by organic aviation units flying small
Center of Military History. 'grasshopper' aircraft in support ofArmy operations immediately
prior to and during World War II, the air arm of the modern
United States Army can more accurately be said to have
originated with the U.S. Congress' 1947 passage ofthe National
Security Act. Among its other sweeping reforms ofthe American
military establishment, this legislation transformed the World
War II-era Army Air Forces into the United States Air Force, a
separate military service effectively responsible forthe operation
ofall non-naval U.S. combat aircraft. Underthe terms ofthe Act,
the Air Force was made responsible for, among other things,
fUlfilling all of the Army's close combat, logistical air support,
aerial photography and tactical reconnaissance requirements.
The Army, for its part, was allowed to maintain a small force of
-
aircraft for liaison and battlefield transportation purposes,
such as the de Havilland of C.anada L-20 Beaver, ~s .well.as
though a joint 1949 Army-USAF agreement specified that t~e
clearing the way for ~he establls~mentof the Army s first five
Army's fixed-wing machines could not exceed 2500 pounds In
helicoptertransportation companl~s. ,
weight, nor its helicopters 4000 pounds..
The war in Korea was a proving ground for the. Army s
Within afew years of its creation the Air Force became de~p~y
embryonic air arm. Throughout the.c0L!rse of the.c.onfllct. ~rmy
involved in the development of the strategic bombers, balll~tlc
fixed-wing aircraft did yeoman service In the traditional liaison,
missiles and supersonic fighters needed to meet the growing
observation and VIP transport roles, and performed equ~lIy as
threat presented by the increasingly agwessive forces of th.e
well at such new tasks as forward air control o! att~ck alrc!"aft,
Soviet Union and her allies. Though obviously necessary, this
electronic warfare and, on more tha~ o~e OCCaSI?~,Improvised
concentration on 'high-tech' aircraft and aviation programmes
tactical air support. The Army's belief In the military valu~ of
nonetheless ensured that the Army co-operation mission did
helicopterswas quicklyvindicated in Kore~,forcombatoperations
not receivethe level of prioritythe Army felt it deserved. Indeed,
with the Bell H-13, Sikorsky H-19. and Hille~ H-23 soon pro:red
the Air Force's perceived inabilityto adequatelyfulfill the Army's
that rotary-wing aircraft were Ideally sUlte~ for. battlefl~ld
aviation needs, coupled with the USAF's continuin~ resistance
surveillance, casualty evacuation and t~e rapid POIt}t-to~polnt
to the Army's creation of an air arm that would In any w~y movement of men, equipment and supplies upon which victory
impinge on whatthe Air Force considered to be its ovyn domain,
in modern warfare increasingly depended. .
forced the Army to begin a careful and often ~!r~ums'pe~t
During the latter stages of the Korean W~r, and In the years
expansion of its own aviation resources and capabilities '0'lthln
immediately following the end of that conflict, th~ Army began
and in some cases, beyond the limits set by the applicable
inte~service s~ch to put into practice many ofthe valuabl~les.so.ns It had learned
agreements. This expansion, which inclu.ded
aboutthe organization and use of?rg~nlcaVlatl~na~sets.These
things as a push for the development of an. organic tactical
years sawthe organization and actlvatlo.n ofthe first I~dependent
cargo transport capability and the formula~lon of new ~nd
aviation units, the Army's first operational ev~luatlon of such
innovative doctrine for the combat use of helicopters, was Just
fixed-wing jet aircraft as the Cessna T-37 and Flat G-91~ and.the
beginning to flourish when the Korea~War bro.ke out.
formulation of a new tactical doctrine that for the first time
At the time hostilities commenced In Korea In June of 1950,
promised to makefull use ofthe immense potent!al value ofthe
the Army had some 660 fixed-wing and fifty-seven rotarY-'0'ing
military helicopter. In a~dition~ t.he ~ecade f~llowlng the Korean
aircraft in its inventory, though many of the former were either
War witnessed increaSing offiCial Inter~st In the dev~l.opment
obsolete types dating to World War II or essentially. stock
and deployment of new aircraft types Intended specifically to
commercial designs unsuited for combat use, and most of the
meet the Army's particular aviation needs. Indeed,.by 1960 t.he
latterwere small training machines. Moreover, an acuteshortage
Army inventory included some 5,000 aircraft of fifteen major
of pilots and ground crews further complicated initial at~empts
types. Though many of these new designs we!"e one of a kind
to field the operational aircraftso desperately needed dUring the
flight test support aircraft, surface-effect machln~s, compound
early days of the war. Army aviation ~nswe~ed the challenge
rotorcraft individual lift devices and other exotic (not to say
despitethese difficulties, however, and In thefirst mon.t~~oft~e
eccentric)'experimental vehicles meantto explore emerging new
conflict pilots and ground crew hastily recalled from civilian life
technologies, during the late 1950s and early 196~s the ~rmy
kept the vintage L-4s and L-5s in the air and working in support
was also developing and introducing other, more Immediately
ofthe United Nations forces.
useful types. The Vertol CH-21 Shawnee, de Havilland ofCanada
As the months passed the initial period of make-do improvis
U-6 Beaver and U-1 Otter, Sikorsky CH-34 Chc:ctaw, Bell UH-1
ation gave way to an increasingly rapid expan~ionofthe A.rmy's
Iroquois, Grumman OV-1 Mohawk and Boelng-Vertol CH-47
aviation arm as more funds became available for aircraft
Chinookall entered the Army inventory between 1954and 1962.
acquisition. As an example, in the fiscal years (FY) 1949 and
It was these aircraft, and the tactics developed around the~,
1950 the Army had procured only 481 aircraft; in FY 1952. the
which were to form the basis ofthe Army's initial operations In
number of machines ordered jumped to more than 3600, with a
the Vietnam War. .
further 700 machines ordered in FY 1953. Among the first new If Korea was a proving ground for the infant Army air arm,
types procured was the immensely capable Ce.ssna L-1~ (3ird Vietnam was a fiery crucible in which the force was tempered
Dog, which began replacing the older observation a~d liaison and from which it ultimately emerged far stronger a.nd vast!y
machines in combat units in the spring of 1951. The Air Force's more capable. The first Army aircraft ~eployed to. Vletn~m In
October 1951 lifting of the Army aircraft weight restrictions appreciable numbers - fourtransportation companies equipped
further enhancedthe Army's aviation capabilities byallowingthe with Vertol CH-21 Shawnee helicopters - arrived in South
procurement of larger and more capable fixed-wing machines Vietnam in late 1961 and early 1962. Though initially tasked
-
----------------------
medium transports ultimately ledto thetransferofthose craftto
solely '0"ith supporting South Vietnamese forces, Army aircraft
t~e US~F,the Arr:ny continued to operate such other important
and aViators soon broadened the range of their activities to
fixed-Wing machines as the venerable 0-1 (L-19) Bird Dog,
match th~ United States' growing involvement in all aspects of
Beech U-21 Ute, Grumman OV-1 Mohawk, and even electronic
~he conflict. A~d as the level of American participation steadily
warfare variants of the Lockheed P-2 Neptune naval patrol
!ncreased so did the number and type ofArmy aircraft deployed
bomber.
I~ the c?mbat areas. In January 1963 there were 222 Army
Vietnam was indeed atesting ground for Army aviation and
alrc~aft. In-country, 149 of which were helicopters; by the ~ombat
eXPE':rience ther.e led directly to the development and
b~glnnlngof October 1964 the Army had 406 aircraft in South
Implementation of a Wide range of systems that have since
Vietnam, including 259 helicopters.
becom~ standard for milit~ry rotary- and fixed-wing aircraft.
This early period of American involvement in Vietnam also
These Include advanced aircraft protection devices such as
saw the first operational application of a new and innovative
radarwarning receive~s,electronic cou.ntermeasures equipment,
avi.ation doctrine known as 'airmobility', a concept that would
and cha~f an~ flare dispensers, a variety of target acquisition
ultimatelychan~ebot~thefundamental nature ofArmy aviation
and deSignation systems, advanced airborne reconnaissance
and the '0"ay .In which the Army developed, acquired and
gea~, and a dizzying array of extremely effective weapons. And
deployed Its aircraft. The airmobility concept had been under
tactics developed and perfected in Vietnam have also been
development since the late 1950s, and in 1963 the 11th Air
passed into the po~t-Vietnam.a~e: nap-of-the-earth flight to
Assault Division was established specifically to test the doctrine
defeat enemy detection and anti-aircraft systems, the destruction
and tactics codified the previous year by the Army Tactical
of enemy a~moured,:,ehicle~by hun~er-killerteams made up of
Mobility Requ.irements Board. Based on the use of large
an observ:atl.on machine equlppe~with a lasertarget designator
numbers of lightly armed transport helicopters to quickly
and. a mls~i1e-armed attack h~llcop.ter, the use of specially
transport troops and supplies into and out of the combat area
fro~ eqUipped flxed- and rotary-wing aircraft to support special
airmobility drew its inspiration and many of its tactics
operations forces, and the use of highly sophisticated manned
su~cessfulFrenc.h mi.litary experiences with helicopters in Indo
and unmanned aircraft for intelligence collection over the
C.hlna and AIQerla. Simply put, airmobility envisaged the use of
moder.n battlefield. And all of these various developments in
aircraft organicto Army unitsto eliminatethetraditional reliance
both aircraft hardware and aviation tactics have been validated
on sl.ow and vulnerable ground transport and at the same time
in act!on,w~etherduring routine peacetime operations in Europe
provl~egr?und.commandersatheretofore undreamed ofability
or ASia, dUring the deployment of Army aircraft and aviators to
to rapidlyfind, fiX, e':lgage and, ifnecessary, disengagefrQm the
such areas oftension as Central America, or in actual combat in
ene~y.The use ofhigh-performance attack helicoptersto escort
Grenada and, more recently, the Persian Gulf and Panama.
t~e Ilg~t!y-armedtransport aircraft was an integral part of the
In the years since the end of the Vietnam War the United
alrmobillty concept, and the Army's adoption of the doctrine
States Army has continued to be a leader in the development of
thus ultimately led directly to the development of the first
adv~ncedpurpose-bui!taircraft. These includetypes currently in
purpose-built helicopter gunship, the Bell AH-1 Cobra.
serVice, such as the Sikorsky UH-60 Blackhawk family of utility
As first practised in Vietnam, airmobility relied primarily on the
transport and special operations support aircraft, the McDonnell
CH-21, though by 1964 the ageing and overburdened Shawnee
Douglas AH-64 Ap~che attack helicopter, high-technology test
had been almost entirely replaced bythe newerand vastly more
beds such as the Sikorsky Rotor Systems Research Aircraft and
capable B~1l UH-1 Iroquois. The Huey, as the latter craft was machin~s
such still-evolving as the Bell-Boeing V-22 Ospreytilt
alrT"!0st universally kn~wn, quickly became the dominant Army
rotor. The Army also continues to adapt selected civil aircraft
helicopter type In Vietnam and did yeoman duty as troop
such asthe F~kkerF.27.an~ Shorts SD3-30for military use,while
and VIP transport, armed escort, medical evacuation aircraft
speci~1 at the same time continuing the upgrading and modernization
electronic warfare and operations support platform, and
of such existing types as the CH-47 Chinook AH-1 Cobra and
command and control machine. Other newtypes which followed
OH-58 Kiowa. '
the UH-1. into servic~ in Vietnam included the Hughes OH-6
The tran~forma.tion of United States Army aviation from a
Cayuse light obser~atlonhelicopter in 1965, the first examples
smal.1 an~ III-eqUipped post-World War II liaison force into a
of the above-':l'lentl~nedAH-1 Cobra gunship in 1967, and the
credlbl.e Independ~nt air arm c~pable of supporting Army
Bel.1 OH-58 KIOwa In 1969. Though Vietnam was primarily a
op~ratlonsworldWide was noteasily accomplished, nor have its
~ellcopterwarforthe Army, several fixed-wing types carried out
gains,been easily f!1aintained. Early U.S. Air Force envy of the
Importa':lt tasks as well, especially in the tactical transport and
electronic warfare roles. Though continued Air Force resistance Army s lea~~rshlp In the development of military vertical flight
and OPPOSition to the Army's attempts to develop its own
to Army ownership of de Havilland Caribou twin-engined
AUTHOR'S NOTE
tactical aViation assets, though muted with time, have not
entirely disappeared and interservice rivalry continues to cause
unnecessary friction. Recurring budgetary restrictions, the
increasingly fantastic sums of money needed to acquire, field
and maintain modern combat aircraft, the ebb and flow of In order to provide the most complete coverage possible of the
changing national priorities and, above all, the absolute necessity topic, I have included in this volume all manned aircraft types
to remain constantly prepared for action anywhere in an ever known to have been used operationally by, or evaluated but not
more unsettled world, have all played a part in making Army ultimately adopted for use by, the Regular Army, the Army
aviation the force it is today. Yet, fortunately, it is aforce which, Reserve and the Army National Guard. I have also included
despite the limitations placed upon it, continues to be the most several air cushion vehicles and ground effect machines which,
capable of its kind in the free world. at first glance, might not seem to qualify as true aircraft.
However, these vehicles were considered aircraft by the Army
and were, with only a few exceptions, assigned aircraft desig
nations and serial numbers.
In the interests of clarity I have listed the aircraft in both
alphabetical and chronological order. This is, the aircraft are
* See bibliographyforalistofseveral goodgeneral histories.
listed alphabetically by manufacturer's name and, when several
aircraftfrom the same manufacturerare included,theyare listed
within the manufacturer's grouping inthechronological orderin
which theywere first obtained bytheArmy. The readerwill note
that although in some cases this method of listing will cause
several aircraftfrom the same manufacturerto beseeminglyout
of order- for example, the Sikorsky H-39, which the Army first
acquired in 1954, is listed before the Sikorsky H-34 and H-37,
which were acquired in, respectively, 1955and 1956- it allows
a more accurate indication of when each aircraft type was
actually acquired. In compiling the alphabetical listing I have
chosen to use the manufacturer's name that was in use during
the majorityofthetime each aircraftwas inthe Army's inventory,
rather than using either the original or the most recent version
of a given manufacturer's corporate identity. I have thus, for
example, listed several aircraft designed and originally built by
Piasecki Aircraft under the Vertol Aircraft heading, for the
aircraft in question were acquired and used by the Army after
Vertol bought out the original Piasecki concern. I have likewise
listed the AH-64 Apache attack helicopter under McDonnell
Doug.las HelicopterCompany,thefirm that iscurrentlyproducing
the aircraft for the Army, rather than under Hughes Helicopters,
the firm that originally developed the machine.
In still another attempt to impose greater clarity on an often
confusing topic, Ihave listed each aircraft underthe most recent
basic type designation it held or, in the case of current
~achines,holds at the time this volume is going to press. This
I~ a necessity because many of the aircraft used by the Army
Since 1947 have carried avariety of designations, depending on
the period in which they were introduced, the use to which a
particularvariantofthe basic machinewas being put, and so on.
Thus, for example, the de Havilland of Canada Caribou is listed
underthe C-7 designation assigned to the type in January 1967,
and which the few examples still in Army service in 1990 still
carry, rather than the CV-2 designation the Caribou carried for ever having been officially transferred to the Army. As any
the initial part of its Army service. Similarly, helicopters are aircraft buffcan attest, trying to track down accurate information
designated by the basic prefix H in the top line of each entry, on such borrowed airplanes can be extremely difficult, and
rather than as 'CH' for cargo helicopter, 'TH' for training trying to locate suitable photographs of said airplanes in Army
machine, and so on. Then in the body of the text for each markings can be virtually impossible. The same sort of problem
machine I have covered the designations assigned to the is encountered when one seeks information regarding the
variants of each individual type. In the same vein, in the top line approximately twenty-seven aircraft the Army has acquired
of each entry I have listed only those aircraft nicknames that through the U.S. Government's Confiscated/Excess Aircraft
were officially recognized by the Army. The Bell UH-1 is Programme (C/EAP). These machines (which are known to
therefore referred to in the heading line bythe official nickname include at least one Gates Learjet, a Short 330, a Brittan
'Iroquois', rather than by the admittedly more widely used Norman Islander, and a variety of light piston models) were
'Huey'. transferred to the Army after being seized by the Federal
In the technical data section for each of the various aircraft I Government from drug smugglers and other law breakers and
have used those dimension figures supplied by the aircraft are apparently used by the Army to support on-going U.S. anti
manufacturer, but have relied on performance figures deter drug operations. The Army has steadfastly declined to offer
mined by the Army itself. This was a conscious decision on my specific information about the aircraft for fear of compromising
part, forthough an aircraft's measurements are more accurately the confidentiality of the C/EAP and American anti-smuggling
determined by the firm that built the craft, the same machine's operations and methods, and I have therefore chosen not to
top speed, service ceiling, or load-carrying capacity in actual include them in this volume.
operational service is often vastly different to that calculated by Iwould welcome any information on, or photos of, additional
asales-minded manufacturer. Having said this, however, Imust Army aircrafttypes, aswell as anycorrections to the information
remindthe readerthatspecific performancefigures cited forany contained in this volume. Readers may contact me via the
particular aircraft represent the optimum performance ofwhich publisher, and may rest assured that I am always happy to be
that machine was capable under the best possible conditions. corrected.
Speed, service ceiling, range, fuel consumption, and maximum
payloadfigures are neverabsolute,fortheyare dependentupon Stephen Harding
such factors asthe fuel load and number ofcrewmen carried by Springfield, Virginia.
the aircraft, the geographic area in which the machine is December 1989
operating, the number and type ofweapons carried, whetHer or
not the aircraft is flying in formation, and so on. Two otherwise
identical aircraftwill often havediffering performance capabilities.
under exactly the same circumstances. The figures cited in this
volume are therefore based upon the United States Army's
determination of each aircraft's optimum performance under
ideal conditions.
All information contained in this book was obtained from
non-classified open sources. This applies especially to the
designations, capabilities, and numbers of those Army aircraft
formerly or currently used for classified intelligence-related
activities and special operations, and to the designations and
capabilities of intelligence-gathering, navigation, avionics, and
other systems fitted to such aircraft.
Finally, I must admit that, despite my attempts to include all
relevant information about every applicable airplane, this book
is almost certainly incomplete. As the reader will surmise after
even a brief review of the contents of this book, the United
States Army has used adizzying array of aircraft types and sub
types. In many cases a single example of a particular airplane
was borrowed from another militaryservice, used extensively in
Army markings, and returned to its original owners, all without