Reflections-Grumman S-2 Tracker

It was to be our fourth ASW aircraft following on from the Firefly, Gannet, and the Wessex. Having flown the other aircraft, I was naturally keen to check out in the new bird to see how it compared.

As with the Skyhawk, the RAN had made a very wise decision not to attempt to “improve” the Tracker in any way. So often in the past we thought that we knew better than the supplier and “Australianised” a major purchase to our detriment.

Apart from ensuring that the instruments in the aircraft all came from the one supplier, they were to be stock standard Fiscal Year 1966 USN machines (we had fortunately discovered that in the US, the instrument dial can be the same but the innards can be totally different).

The Tracker was a classic anti submarine (ASW ) aircraft. The airframe and engine combination had been right from the start and its box like fuselage meant that every now and then it could be gutted and the latest ASW gear installed. This had been the failing of aircraft such as the Gannet which were built around a particular generation of ASW equipment and were very difficult to modify or update.

One interesting aspect of the aircraft was that it didn’t have a main spar, this meant thatit had one ofthe most complicated wing fold locking pin arrangements I have ever seen. From memory there were sixteen pins around the circumference of the wing join. As with the Skyhawk there was no battery and no capability for a self start, however battery packs were made up locally which could be carried when a land away made this necessary.

The Tracker was a big aircraft weighing 13,234kg (29,150lbs) at maximum weight with a wing span of 22. lmtr (72ft 6in) and a length of 13. 3mtr (43ft 6in). Because of the short fuselage length, rudder boost was provided in the form of additional rudder area which was switched in for takeoff and landing. This effectively doubled the rudder area under these conditions and gave a single engine control speed of 90kts. I checked out in summer and can well recall sweating out my engine failures on takeoff procedures. This was of course done with the “failed” engine at idle and although the aircraft handled OKat minimum speed, you had to work atit to obtain optimum performance. We carried out numerous engine failures at altitude and as I recall, the big bird handled quite well on one. The aircraft was of course powered by two W right Cyclone radial engines of 1,520hp each and from memory they never gave us any trouble.

At about the time I checked out in the Tracker, the RAN was going through the trauma of deciding on the crew structure for the aircraft. The USN operated it with two pilots and two sensor operators. The second pilot was the tactical coordinator or “Tacho” and all the necessary equipment for him to fulfill this role was carried up front. We of course had our Observer branch and the question was whether an observer should occupy the right hand front seat. Shortly after I converted to the aircraft, Navy Office tasked NAS Nowra to examine the matter and to make a recommendation as to which way we should go. After much ideological and “trade union” discussion we agreed to recommend that we give it a go, thatis single pilot operation. To my knowledge we never had any problems.

At least we were saved from a repeat of the incident which is alleged to have occurred in the USN at night, when the copilot for some reason thought the pilot was having trouble with the aircraft elevator trim. He decided to lend a hand and pulled back on the control column. The pilot felt the rearward pressure and pushedforward on the control column. The two pilots then proceeded to fight each other on the controls, with one pushing and one pulling, until finally they flew the aircraftinto the water! I can’t vouch for the authenticity of the story, no doubt similar tales have been told about other aircraft.

Nothing much untoward happened during my conversion; apart from a very good lesson during my night checkout how we become conditioned animals and react on previous experience. On the ride in question I flew in the right hand seat for the first time. Now it was SOP for the person not flying the aircraft to adjust power, pitch and mixture after takeoff at the direction of the person flying the aircraft. The three controls were located in the overhead console with the mixture control having three positions, rich, auto rich andidle cut off. As directed, after takeoff I reached up and reduced boost and then grasped what I thought were the pitch levers. I had of course in error grabbed the mixture levers. As I retarded the levers nothing happened to the revs. I had the levers a fair way back before the penny dropped and I very hastily pushed them forward again. Analysing afterwards,it was very clear that the combination of a relatively unfamiliar cockpit, at night in the copilot’s seat for the first time, was a perfect recipe for making a mistake.

I was always conscious in the Tracker of the fact that there was a lot more to go wrong than sayin a single seatjet. We flew it strictly per the NATOPS (USN operations) manual which was based on the principle of memorised primary actions in the event of an emergency, followed by a check list challenge and reply.

Having been brought up on the British pilot’s notes system, where everything was committed to memory, I found that although the challenge and reply method effectively negates errors, I never really got to know the checks asI had done under the British system.

In terms of handling, I found the aircraft pleasant and easy to fly. Takeoff was pretty straightforward with no tendency to swing, and the oleos designed for decklanding could take anything dished out on arrival. TaxYing wasn’t a problem, in fact I can’t think of any specific problem areas worth mentioning. It was a big solid aircraft designed to meet US Navy specs and you don’t get any better than that ask the RAAF what they think of the Hornet!

We naturally flew with parachutes but had them unbuckled most of the time because at the height we generally flew; it would have been impossible to have successfully bailed out. In any case it would have been a battle even at altitude to have buckled up and made it to the door which was located on the starboard side aft. Ditching was another matter as there were good escape routes for all the crew onto the top of the aircraft This was proved in the one and only loss of a Tracker from HMAS Melbourne in 1975 when a Tracker missed the wires on a night landing and for some reason never established (I was the President of the Board of Enquiry!) ditched ahead of the ship. I had formed a view as to the cause but this was not accepted and an open finding resulted. The crew all successfully escaped and were soon picked up by the rescue destroyer.

Towards the end of my conversion I set out one bright and pleasant afternoon on a sea navex with a young midshipman observer. I had completed all my instrument flying sequences and it only remained to take the formal flight test which had been scheduled for the following day.

As we turned for home on the last leg, we discovered that an unforecast southerly onshore breeze had sprung up forming low cloud from the coast inland creating instrument conditions at base; a not unknown occurrence at Nowra. My authorising officer happened to be the squadron CO who had been my instructor during the conversion. I understand that he breathed a big sigh of relief as we successfully landed off a GCA! There was no way, ticket or not, would I have attempted to get back to Nowra under a southerly drift. The time honoured way back in the days of Fireflies had been to locate the mouth ofthe Shoalhaven River at the Shoalhaven Heads, fly up the river to the bridge and then turn left to follow the road until hopefully you saw the approach lights. Not to be recommended! The only weaponry that Ididin the Tracker was ASW bombing which was never very exciting at the best of times. All you did was to entera shallow dive, hoping to arrive before the submarine submerged, releasing your depth charges essentially by eye with the aim of achieving a straddle. It was pure WWII stuff, I doubt you would find too many submarines on the surface nowadays.

As is well documented, we lost almost the entire first batch of Trackers in the disastrous hangar fire of December 1976. These were replaced by second hand USN S-2G machines which were subsequently allowed to rot at NAS Nowra when HMAS Melbourne was disposed of. This was not the Navy’s fault because by then they were by that stage out of our hands, but it is a national disgrace that this was allowed to occur.

W hat is possibly not as well known is that there was another fairly disastrous fire involving the Tracker when the Weapon Systems Trainer which was a static flight simulator housed in two massive trailers, was gutted one Christmas eve. The cause was traced to a coffee pot which had been left on and which had inevitably burst into flames when its contents had finally evaporated.

Against all odds, an old observer of mine who was then a staff officer in Navy Office, fought a replacement through the system and it was duly installed at NAS Nowra. As might be imagined, the replacement had just about every device known to man to protect it from fire, including a system for flooding the entire complex with an inert gas.

Now I have long since come to accept that I am not compatible with electronics and that ifI am associated with a system it will inevitably misbehave! Digressing, I recall my instructor telling me as we were about to do my first night trip in a Tiger Moth, which had had a battery installed to power the navigation lights, that I was about to experience electricity in an aircraft and that it would be problems from here on in. He was right of course! By the time the new Weapons System Trainer had been installed at NAS Nowra I had moved on to become the Executive Officer, or second in command, and fires in any form were my responsibility. As with all things electronic and me, the fire detection system began to malfunction and the alarm would go off at all times of the day or night. Much amusement was afforded to the residents of the married quarters as they saw me speeding to the scene for the umpteenth time!

Returning to the aircraft itself, as I mentioned at the beginning,it had been mygood fortune to the fly the Firefly and Gannet in squadron service which unfortunately was not to be my lot with the Tracker. I really only had a minimal checkout in it but I must say that I envied the crews who at last had an aircraft which was really ASW capable, it must have been very satisfying.

The next aircraft is the Macchi, not so much about the aircraft but the aftermath of one being spun in, inverted!