Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!att!cbnews!military From: baldwin@cad.usna.mil (J.D. Baldwin) Newsgroups: sci.military Subject: Re: Trefoil marking on A-6 vs. EA-6B Message-ID: <10623@cbnews.ATT.COM> Date: 26 Oct 89 01:28:10 GMT Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM Lines: 19 Approved: military@att.att.com From: "J.D. Baldwin" The message has expired here, but someone "corrected" my statement that A-6's do not have the "radiation" trefoil on their nose radome and that only EA-6B's do. Well, I'm the last guy to pick a nit, but no one else has spoken, so... I *know* that the A-6 does not have such a marking. I know this from my own long and glorious carrier aviation experience. But JUST to make sure I wasn't going crazy, I checked with two A-6 pilots and an EA-6B ECMO. None of them have ever seen a) an A-6 *with* the trefoil, or b) an EA-6B *without* one. Seems it's not even a warning symbol, really--it's just there so that carrier deck handlers can tell them apart easily from the front aspect. -- >From the catapult of: |+| "If anyone disagrees with anything I _, J. D. Baldwin, Comp Sci Dept |+| say, I am quite prepared not only to __||____..}-> US Naval Academy |+| retract it, but also to deny under \ / baldwin@cad.usna.navy.mil |+| oath that I ever said it." --T. Lehrer ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~