A Bad Idea…

 

Navy Training Command TA-4J Skyhawk

This story describes an incident involving an instructor pilot’s poor judgment that could have resulted in tragedy but didn’t. I was a student Naval Aviator at Naval Air Station Kingsville, TX, when the incident occurred. Its aftermath included everyone being formally briefed about it. The consensus reaction was: “You got to be kidding me!”

The key players were two former Marine F-4 drivers who were Advanced Jet flight instructors flying the TA-4J Skyhawk. Both were within a month of voluntarily leaving the military to pursue their post-military airline careers. They were popular instructors, having served over two years in Kingsville without incident. As a reward for their service and in anticipation of their imminent departure to civilian life, their Commanding Officer approved their request for an Instructor-Only cross country training flight to somewhere on the West Coast. Their assignment was to fly multiple instrument approaches at various military airfields over the course of the weekend. These requests weren’t routinely granted. The benefit for the instructors was the hands-on stick time in the front seat and instrument approach practice they’d get as they alternated turns.

First, some background: During a standard by-the-book takeoff, the pilot pulls back on the stick (“rotates”) at the take-off airspeed, sets the nose 10-degrees above the horizon and when the Rate-of-Climb (ROC) indicator shows a positive climb and the altimeter is increasing, the pilot retracts the landing gear. Due to a slight lag in the indicators, the aircraft are usually 100-200 feet above the ground when the gear is retracted. That’s good because if the engine hiccups prior to that and the runway is long enough, you can theoretically put the plane back on the ground without having to wait for the landing gear to lower and lock again.

But when the Blue Angels do their air shows, they retract the landing gear when the jet is just barely off the ground and then level off and accelerate quickly to a speed that allows them to pull up suddenly into a spectacular vertical climb at the end of the runway. The Blue Angels practice this technique and have perfected it and that’s why their airshows are so fun to watch. Unfortunately for the heroes of this story, the Blues do NOT use the technique ascribed to them below to accomplish their “low transition”! The reasons will soon become obvious to you dear Reader, and they soon became obvious to our soon-to-be-former flight instructors when they tried it!

Doing a Blue Angel-style “low transition” was frowned upon – unless you were flying with the Blue Angels. In fact, they were forbidden during normal flight operations and especially at a Navy training base where students were watching and copying everything.

But flying into an Air Force base was different. It was accepted as Gospel that Air Force pilots were technically skilled by-the-book bureaucrats who couldn’t do anything if it wasn’t described somewhere in a book. (I apologize here to my youngest son, an Air Force pilot, for this unfortunate stereotype. My only excuse is that we were very young and didn’t know any better.) Thus, when a Navy or Marine pilot chanced to grace an Air Force base with their presence, it was thought important to show them some of the finer details of flying that they might be missing. This category would include a Blue-Angels-style takeoff and so that’s where our Marines decided to try this mythical “low transition” technique.

The technique was thought to be the following: After taking the runway and going to full throttle, raise the landing gear handle using the override switch. Then release the brakes and take-off normally but level off just after take-off, low over the runway.

Wait – won’t the landing gear retract, embarrassing one and all? Theoretically no. There is a little switch on the main landing gear that detects when the landing gear struts are fully compressed (due to the weight of the airplane resting firmly on them). The switch prevents the landing gear from retracting when the aircraft is on the ground – which seems like a good idea.

So what does our hero think he’s gaining by raising the landing gear handle? He believes that the weight-on-gear switch will keep the landing gear extended until he rotates the nose and lifts off into the air. At that time, the main landing gear struts decompress as the wing lifts the jet off the ground and the switch indicates that the jet is not “on the ground” so the landing gear can safely retract. Immediately and automatically.

What’s the Override switch and why does he need it? It’s possible that the “weight-on-gear” switch might fail and mistakenly indicate that the aircraft is on the ground when it is actually airborne. If this happens when flying off the carrier, you might wish to retract the landing gear to reduce drag and allow you time to troubleshoot the problem, fly to an airfield ashore, or go get some fuel at the nearest airborne tanker. So the engineers provide an override switch that allows the pilot to raise the landing gear handle (select Retract) even if the weight-on-gear switch says you’re still on the ground. The assumption is that no pilot in their right mind would try to retract the landing gear on the ground and if they are trying to do so while the switch still indicates “on-the-ground”, the switch must be wrong. (If you’re having trouble following this, don’t worry. I’ve skipped a couple of technical details that would explain it all. I’m just trying not to get sidetracked. The story is about What more than How.)

This alleged technique could have produced a major mishap, i.e. “a crash”. It’s a miracle that it didn’t. I have since wondered whether the pilot who tried this might be related to the “Lucky” pilot from my earlier story about the Marine A-4 pilot who survived flying into the water at night. Regardless, his “luck” was well above average.

Everything went as planned up to the moment of liftoff. They hadn’t taken into account that it was a hot summer day in Texas. That meant that the engine wasn’t producing quite as much power as it would in cooler air. Instead of leaping into the air, they staggered, the landing gear retracted, and they settled back onto the runway with the gear up. (Oops…) Luckily, they had two external aluminum drop tanks hanging under the wing and those are what touched the runway.

There was a loud scraping sound as the bottoms of the twin fuel tanks were quickly sanded off and all 600 gallons of jet fuel deposited on the runway. The sudden loss of 4,000 lbs. of fuel (half the fuel load!) meant the jet was suddenly much lighter and miraculously it became airborne again. That shouldn’t have been possible for many reasons. The “how” remains a mystery to me even today! (Fortunately and by design, JP4 jet fuel is not as flammable as gasoline and the aluminum pieces and plumbing inside the drop tanks didn’t produce sufficient sparks to cause a fire or explosion.)

So now our Navy Training Command Skyhawk is airborne and climbing like a rocket. (It’s very light!) There’s no fire. No Emergency indicator lights. Just a loud and annoying noise from the ragged open bottoms of the two drop tanks! What should they do next? They would not be welcome guests at the Air Force base on whose runway they’d dumped 600 gallons of jet fuel. Thinking fast, they remembered a Marine airfield within range of their remaining fuel so they refiled their flight plan airborne for this new destination, keeping a cautious eye on the emergency fire lights and pondering their collective future.

It was a grim picture. They were lucky to be alive and were likely to be grounded and/or discharged from the service as soon as they returned. So they decided to make the best of it. They made lemonade. They did wish they’d seen the face on the Air Force Duty Officer in charge of the airfield when he was told that a Navy jet had just baptized his main runway with 600 gallons of jet fuel and then flown away.

They landed at Marine Air Field XYZ and quickly found the senior Master Gunnery Sargent in charge of Maintenance. They explained the situation – roughly – and asked whether he could have his crew tape up the damaged drop tanks with ordnance tape (a particularly robust and sticky kind of duct tape) so they’d be good enough to fly back to home plate. Marines have a “can-do” attitude and this “Gunny” was no different. It was done as requested and after refueling, the Skyhawk continued on its way – not back to Kingsville, but continuing to their original destination. (That there was a woman of interest at the original destination is just hearsay…)

The two Marines returned Sunday night to Kingsville and upon landing were informed by the Maintenance Officer that the Skipper requested their immediate presence. (The Maintenance Chief was not amused by the two destroyed drop tanks either.) The Skipper had received a phone call from his boss, the Air Wing commander, who in turn had been contacted by an Air Force General in charge of the airfield whose runways had been unexpectedly closed due to the need to clean up a major jet fuel spill, thanks to a Navy Skyhawk suffering an apparently major “fuel leak” on takeoff.

The details of their punishment have been lost from memory but I do recall that they were grounded and never flew again in the military, being discharged fairly quickly afterward. I never heard whether they did in fact go on to fly for the airlines or FedEx as many ex-military pilots do. It’s possible that having learned a major lesson from this incident, they became the safest pilots in the world but I must admit that if I’d ever run into them at an airport, I would have made a careful note of their employer and hesitated, unfairly or not, to book with that company in the future.

On the other hand, maybe you want to fly with a pilot who seems to have such unbelievable good luck!? Not that I’m superstitious….

Published in Military
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

There are 28 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Judge Mental Member
    Judge Mental
    @JudgeMental

    Max Knots: The assumption is that no pilot in their right mind would try

    Uh…

    • #1
  2. Jim McConnell Member
    Jim McConnell
    @JimMcConnell

    Fascinating story, as usual, @maxknots. It does seem those guys should still be in junior high school, instead of in the Air Force.

    Please keep the stories coming.

    • #2
  3. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Yikes! That’s pretty scary! Not the same kind of thing, but when we lived in CO, we heard periodic issues with private plane pilots not taking into account the extra luggage load when they left to go home. If you don’t know what you’re doing, the results can be pretty bad! Thanks, Max.

    • #3
  4. Muleskinner, Weasel Wrangler Member
    Muleskinner, Weasel Wrangler
    @Muleskinner

    Max Knots: On the other hand, maybe you want to fly with a pilot who seems to have such unbelievable good luck!? Not that I’m superstitious….

    Isn’t the adage “If you’re not lucky, we can’t use you” from the Navy?

    • #4
  5. Doug Watt Moderator
    Doug Watt
    @DougWatt

    Great story, thanks. Police officers have their own acronyms. JFB – (Just F###### Beautiful), EF – (Epic Fail), and then Preventable with no acronym. Preventable was the official finding, and would find its way into reports, the two acronyms did not appear in reports.

    One night after roll call an officer took a short cut loading the shotgun when he placed into the holder between the two front seats. Nine .32 caliber pellets, with no chance of expanding tore through the roof of the car and destroyed the light bar. JFB, EF, and Preventable in one quick moment. 

     

     

    • #5
  6. Heisenberg Member
    Heisenberg
    @Heisenberg

    Every experienced pilot knows, the most potentially dangerous situation is two high-time instructors in an aircraft together.  Especially when they decide to shine their a$$es like this.

    • #6
  7. PappyJim Coolidge
    PappyJim
    @PappyJim

    No Old, Bold aviators in Naval Aviation.

    • #7
  8. Rōnin Coolidge
    Rōnin
    @Ronin

    It’s why they call it a cockpit.

    • #8
  9. iWe Coolidge
    iWe
    @iWe

    Fantastic. Thank you! 

    • #9
  10. Miffed White Male Member
    Miffed White Male
    @MiffedWhiteMale

    Guy I worked with in Madison back in the 1980s was a pilot, his dad had been Air Force (and was killed in a crash doing a checkride with a new pilot, but that’s another story).  Anyway, he told me about a time when he managed to retract the gear in a parked plane, due to a faulty switch.  In  his case, he said due to the fact that it was a very slow news day, a local news report on the incident made it onto the wires and it made national news as a kind of filler item.  He wasn’t pleased.

     

     

    • #10
  11. Max Knots Member
    Max Knots
    @MaxKnots

    Jim McConnell (View Comment):

    Fascinating story, as usual, @ maxknots. It does seem those guys should still be in junior high school, instead of in the Air Force.

    Please keep the stories coming.

    If it helps, remember that I’m only telling stories about the most rare and bizarre events. These things didn’t happen every day so when they did, they were memorable. From our reading chairs today, it seems clear that their decisions were immature at best. Absolutely. And yes, as I write these I sometimes feel like the parent of a teenager wondering “What Were they thinking!?” 

    • #11
  12. Max Knots Member
    Max Knots
    @MaxKnots

    Muleskinner, Weasel Wrangler (View Comment):

    Max Knots: On the other hand, maybe you want to fly with a pilot who seems to have such unbelievable good luck!? Not that I’m superstitious….

    Isn’t the adage “If you’re not lucky, we can’t use you” from the Navy?

    LOL! Never heard that one but I can sure see how that would be an asset in such a dangerous business. You could use the same phrase in many occupations I expect. I was being facetious with the “luck” comment. In fact, a religious person could make a reasonable argument to the effect that the Lord still had things for these folks to do before taking them home.

    • #12
  13. Max Knots Member
    Max Knots
    @MaxKnots

    Doug Watt (View Comment):

    Great story, thanks. Police officers have their own acronyms. JFB – (Just F###### Beautiful), EF – (Epic Fail), and then Preventable with no acronym. Preventable was the official finding, and would find its way into reports, the two acronyms did not appear in reports.

    One night after roll call an officer took a short cut loading the shotgun when he placed into the holder between the two front seats. Nine .32 caliber pellets, with no chance of expanding tore through the roof of the car and destroyed the light bar. JFB, EF, and Preventable in one quick moment.

    Yep DW. That’s a great example of a typical human failure mode – Rushing to do something while giving a more critical task partial attention. Recipe for failure. (Re: your acronyms. I’m going to run them past an ex-patrolman buddy. He’ll enjoy them. Thanks.)

    • #13
  14. navyjag Coolidge
    navyjag
    @navyjag

    Navy v. Air Force fighter jocks. Love the stories.  Sister married into an AF pilot family and got some grief being on a carrier. Then saw we had AF pilots in the Navy air wing.  One an F-4 pilot involved in a serious incident that I got to interview. Asked him why in the hell he wanted to be on a carrier when he could make much smoother landings at bases in Viet Nam or Thailand. Said he always envied the Navy guys since they got to do controlled crash landings every day and wanted to see how much fun it was. 

    • #14
  15. Skyler Coolidge
    Skyler
    @Skyler

    That’s one of the benefits of flying double bubble, the drop tanks are designed to behave just like that for the A-4. I wouldn’t rely on that for the A-6, which uses the same drop tank.  As a second lieutenant from ‘85 to ‘87, I was the power plants officer for H&MS-13, the intermediate maintenance activity (IMA) for the A-4, OA-4, C-130, and A-6 squadrons in El Toro California.  I had quite a collection of drop tanks that we never had the parts or time to fix.  Among the collection were a small number that were shaved in half from A-4 wheels up landings.  We usually were able to get rid of those pretty quickly.

    That was a pretty stupid stunt by the air crew.  Weight on wheels switches, or any switches back then were not entirely reliable.  It takes a special kind of stupid to bypass a safety like that.  They’re lucky a faulty weight on wheels switch didn’t just collapse the gear on roll out or wherever they were when the switch was disabled or immediately when the lever was thrown for the gear..

    • #15
  16. Judge Mental Member
    Judge Mental
    @JudgeMental

    Skyler (View Comment):

    That’s one of the benefits of flying double bubble, the drop tanks are designed to behave just like that for the A-4. I wouldn’t rely on that for the A-6, which uses the same drop tank. I was the power plants officer for H&MS-13, the intermediate maintenance activity (IMA) for the A-4, OA-4, C-130, and A-6 squadrons in El Toro California. I had quite a collection of drop tanks that we never had the parts or time to fix. Among the collection were a small number that were shaved in half from A-4 wheels up landings. We usually were able to get rid of those pretty quickly.

    That was a pretty stupid stunt by the air crew. Weight on wheels switches, or any switches back then were not entirely reliable. It takes a special kind of stupid to bypass a safety like that. They’re lucky a faulty weight on wheels switch didn’t just collapse the gear on roll out or wherever they were when the switch was disabled or immediately when the lever was thrown for the gear..

    Seemed to me you could have the switch trip as soon as the weight starts to reduce when the wheels are still bearing some weight, rather than waiting until it zeroed out.

    • #16
  17. Skyler Coolidge
    Skyler
    @Skyler

    Judge Mental (View Comment):

    Skyler (View Comment):

    That’s one of the benefits of flying double bubble, the drop tanks are designed to behave just like that for the A-4. I wouldn’t rely on that for the A-6, which uses the same drop tank. I was the power plants officer for H&MS-13, the intermediate maintenance activity (IMA) for the A-4, OA-4, C-130, and A-6 squadrons in El Toro California. I had quite a collection of drop tanks that we never had the parts or time to fix. Among the collection were a small number that were shaved in half from A-4 wheels up landings. We usually were able to get rid of those pretty quickly.

    That was a pretty stupid stunt by the air crew. Weight on wheels switches, or any switches back then were not entirely reliable. It takes a special kind of stupid to bypass a safety like that. They’re lucky a faulty weight on wheels switch didn’t just collapse the gear on roll out or wherever they were when the switch was disabled or immediately when the lever was thrown for the gear..

    Seemed to me you could have the switch trip as soon as the weight starts to reduce when the wheels are still bearing some weight, rather than waiting until it zeroed out.

    Sure, if you want to install different wiring and sensors, or reposition the switch which is internal to the hydraulic actuator as I recall, but it’s not a realistic alternative.  

    • #17
  18. Judge Mental Member
    Judge Mental
    @JudgeMental

    Skyler (View Comment):

    Judge Mental (View Comment):

    Skyler (View Comment):

    That’s one of the benefits of flying double bubble, the drop tanks are designed to behave just like that for the A-4. I wouldn’t rely on that for the A-6, which uses the same drop tank. I was the power plants officer for H&MS-13, the intermediate maintenance activity (IMA) for the A-4, OA-4, C-130, and A-6 squadrons in El Toro California. I had quite a collection of drop tanks that we never had the parts or time to fix. Among the collection were a small number that were shaved in half from A-4 wheels up landings. We usually were able to get rid of those pretty quickly.

    That was a pretty stupid stunt by the air crew. Weight on wheels switches, or any switches back then were not entirely reliable. It takes a special kind of stupid to bypass a safety like that. They’re lucky a faulty weight on wheels switch didn’t just collapse the gear on roll out or wherever they were when the switch was disabled or immediately when the lever was thrown for the gear..

    Seemed to me you could have the switch trip as soon as the weight starts to reduce when the wheels are still bearing some weight, rather than waiting until it zeroed out.

    Sure, if you want to install different wiring and sensors, or reposition the switch which is internal to the hydraulic actuator as I recall, but it’s not a realistic alternative.

    I wasn’t clear.  I wasn’t suggesting it as a goal, but rather a possibility in this stupid scenario. 

    • #18
  19. Max Knots Member
    Max Knots
    @MaxKnots

    Heisenberg (View Comment):

    Every experienced pilot knows, the most potentially dangerous situation is two high-time instructors in an aircraft together. Especially when they decide to shine their a$$es like this.

    Funny you should say that @heisenberg. That’s something that wasn’t obvious to me at the time but which became so during my subsequent flight instructor tour. You make a good point. One reason this truism might exist is that there’s a question of “who’s in charge” and perhaps hesitation to criticize or correct a peer in their purported area of expertise. We don’t know whether the pilot in the backseat (at least, I don’t remember that detail) fully participated, was unaware of, or actually objected to the idea. 

    I forgot to include that there was some additional fallout from the event in that for the remainder of my time in flight training, instructors weren’t allowed to do non-syllabus cross-country flights without a student. I can’t blame the squadron CO or for that matter, his boss the Wing Commander if that’s where the direction originated. It had been a “nice to do” not a “must do” option – an informal way to reward hard-working pilots who put in a lot of long days. This incident certainly highlighted the inherent dangers discussed above.

    As students, we just thought it was unfortunate because this had been the first of this type of incident and we figured that all the remaining instructors learned the same lesson we did from the incident and became more cautious and better at imagining potential bad results. But we were kids and didn’t have the larger perspective so in hindsight, that was a reasonable policy.

    • #19
  20. Max Knots Member
    Max Knots
    @MaxKnots

    Rōnin (View Comment):

    It’s why they call it a cockpit.

    “Dad joke” alert!

    • #20
  21. Max Knots Member
    Max Knots
    @MaxKnots

    navyjag (View Comment):

    Navy v. Air Force fighter jocks. Love the stories. Sister married into an AF pilot family and got some grief being on a carrier. Then saw we had AF pilots in the Navy air wing. One an F-4 pilot involved in a serious incident that I got to interview. Asked him why in the hell he wanted to be on a carrier when he could make much smoother landings at bases in Viet Nam or Thailand. Said he always envied the Navy guys since they got to do controlled crash landings every day and wanted to see how much fun it was.

    LOL. Was he ever disabused of the notion that it was “fun”? I’m surprised he didn’t mention that he heard there was better grub on the carriers. Oh wait, he was in the Air Force? Never mind. (;-)

    • #21
  22. Max Knots Member
    Max Knots
    @MaxKnots

    Skyler (View Comment):

    That’s one of the benefits of flying double bubble, the drop tanks are designed to behave just like that for the A-4. I wouldn’t rely on that for the A-6, which uses the same drop tank. As a second lieutenant from ‘85 to ‘87, I was the power plants officer for H&MS-13, the intermediate maintenance activity (IMA) for the A-4, OA-4, C-130, and A-6 squadrons in El Toro California. I had quite a collection of drop tanks that we never had the parts or time to fix. Among the collection were a small number that were shaved in half from A-4 wheels up landings. We usually were able to get rid of those pretty quickly.

    That was a pretty stupid stunt by the air crew. Weight on wheels switches, or any switches back then were not entirely reliable. It takes a special kind of stupid to bypass a safety like that. They’re lucky a faulty weight on wheels switch didn’t just collapse the gear on roll out or wherever they were when the switch was disabled or immediately when the lever was thrown for the gear..

    You’re right. That IS why the training command always flew with two drops. Well, that and the extra range it provided. As students we were told not to “worry” if the landing gear didn’t come down because you could land perfectly well on the drops. But I never heard of someone getting airborne again after doing so. And that’s obviously because no one normally would even consider trying it. I still don’t understand how they were able to rotate the nose back up to a takeoff attitude while sanding off the bottom of the tanks.

    • #22
  23. Max Knots Member
    Max Knots
    @MaxKnots

    Judge Mental (View Comment):

    Skyler (View Comment):

    That’s one of the benefits of flying double bubble, the drop tanks are designed to behave just like that for the A-4. I wouldn’t rely on that for the A-6, which uses the same drop tank. I was the power plants officer for H&MS-13, the intermediate maintenance activity (IMA) for the A-4, OA-4, C-130, and A-6 squadrons in El Toro California. I had quite a collection of drop tanks that we never had the parts or time to fix. Among the collection were a small number that were shaved in half from A-4 wheels up landings. We usually were able to get rid of those pretty quickly.

    That was a pretty stupid stunt by the air crew. Weight on wheels switches, or any switches back then were not entirely reliable. It takes a special kind of stupid to bypass a safety like that. They’re lucky a faulty weight on wheels switch didn’t just collapse the gear on roll out or wherever they were when the switch was disabled or immediately when the lever was thrown for the gear..

    Seemed to me you could have the switch trip as soon as the weight starts to reduce when the wheels are still bearing some weight, rather than waiting until it zeroed out.

    @Judgemental: The switches only actuated at full extension and full compression (Skyler – right?). I think that’s the explanation. As @skyler said, the switches were not terribly reliable. I had my own run-in with a faulty one which I described in my “Just A Bad Limit Switch” story (https://ricochet.com/976504/just-a-bad-limit-switch-part-1/). They were a known failure mode.

    • #23
  24. navyjag Coolidge
    navyjag
    @navyjag

    Max Knots (View Comment):

    navyjag (View Comment):

    Navy v. Air Force fighter jocks. Love the stories. Sister married into an AF pilot family and got some grief being on a carrier. Then saw we had AF pilots in the Navy air wing. One an F-4 pilot involved in a serious incident that I got to interview. Asked him why in the hell he wanted to be on a carrier when he could make much smoother landings at bases in Viet Nam or Thailand. Said he always envied the Navy guys since they got to do controlled crash landings every day and wanted to see how much fun it was.

    LOL. Was he ever disabused of the notion that it was “fun”? I’m surprised he didn’t mention that he heard there was better grub on the carriers. Oh wait, he was in the Air Force? Never mind. (;-)

    He did like the carrier food. Who wouldn’t?

    • #24
  25. Skyler Coolidge
    Skyler
    @Skyler

    navyjag (View Comment):

    He did like the carrier food. Who wouldn’t?

    A submariner.

    • #25
  26. navyjag Coolidge
    navyjag
    @navyjag

    Skyler (View Comment):

    navyjag (View Comment):

    He did like the carrier food. Who wouldn’t?

    A submariner.

    Sounds weird to me since we got our steak and lobsters delivered by supply ships or choppers almost ever day.  How could a sub doing 90 days on the bottom keep that stuff fresh?

    • #26
  27. Skyler Coolidge
    Skyler
    @Skyler

    navyjag (View Comment):

    Skyler (View Comment):

    navyjag (View Comment):

    He did like the carrier food. Who wouldn’t?

    A submariner.

    Sounds weird to me since we got our steak and lobsters delivered by supply ships or choppers almost ever day. How could a sub doing 90 days on the bottom keep that stuff fresh?

    Because they send their cooks to very good schools  

    • #27
  28. Miffed White Male Member
    Miffed White Male
    @MiffedWhiteMale

    navyjag (View Comment):

    Skyler (View Comment):

    navyjag (View Comment):

    He did like the carrier food. Who wouldn’t?

    A submariner.

    Sounds weird to me since we got our steak and lobsters delivered by supply ships or choppers almost ever day. How could a sub doing 90 days on the bottom keep that stuff fresh?

    A lot of sandwiches!  (Get it?  sub sandwiches?!   ha ha ha ha  – I crack me up…)

     

     

    • #28