Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!att!cbnews!military
From: gwh%tornado.Berkeley.EDU@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (George William Herbert)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re:  Trefoil marking on A-6 vs. EA-6B
Summary: I'm not blind...
Message-ID: <10675@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Date: 27 Oct 89 03:29:42 GMT
Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM
Organization: ucb
Lines: 27
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: gwh%tornado.Berkeley.EDU@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (George William Herbert)
In article <10623@cbnews.ATT.COM> baldwin@cad.usna.mil (J.D. Baldwin) writes:
>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.

	I have seen and may have pictures (from Moffit Field NAS July 4 
airshows from last several yrs.) of A-6's with the entire radome as
a big trefoil in two shades of (tan? yellow?  whatever it was.)

	Perhaps it's an operational difference between East and West 
coast squadrons... or just a peculiarity to that squadron.


****************************************
George William Herbert  UCB Naval Architecture Dpt. (my god, even on schedule!)
maniac@garnet.berkeley.edu  gwh@ocf.berkeley.edu
----------------------------------------