33dInd
Veteran Member
I kinda think we all know why now without really saying soWell, cool.
But why now all of a sudden,?
Or I’m kinda suspicious
I kinda think we all know why now without really saying soWell, cool.
But why now all of a sudden,?
Those plans may have been shelved because after the war municipal and private airfields sprang up like mushrooms after the rain. Now many of them only exist in memory, a few faded photographs or a small monument or historical plaque in front of a strip mall. Back then plans to use the interstates as runways may not have had the same priority as during the war or now.
Warthogs and F22's aren't b29's or P51's. They weren't designed with this in mind. Would potential FOD (Foreign Object Damage) from debris on roadways be an issue for the newer aircraft?
I manage the designs of many Interstate projects in my state. I can assure you that aircraft loading or clearances are not part of our design criteria. Our design requirements are predominately guided by:
I'd be glad to cite any design spec you want, but there is absolutely nothing in our designs that address aircraft requirements. Jeezecrise we have a hard enough time budgeting projects to accomodate trucks.
- AASHTO's A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets (aka "The Green Book")
- AASHTO's A Policy on Design Standards - Interstate System
- The state Road Design Manual (tighter standards in many areas than the above)
Cold War exercises in Europe,
At Hahn AB, other wing personnel participated in a NATO exercise. During this exercise, two 496th TFS F-16s conducted the first emergency procedures landings on an autobahn. The aircrews landed, refueled from dispatched trucks and launched from a highway near the German air base at Ahlhorn.
The wing also prepared for a large-scale deployment to several air bases due to programmed runway repairs at Hahn AB. Aircraft and crews, maintenance specialists and support personnel deployed to Ramstein and Spangdahlem ABs and to West Germany's Pferdsfel AB from April to June 1984.
German Wikipedia Link: Autobahn Notlandeplatz - Motorway Emergency Airfield http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autobahn...
Runtime 1:28
Planes Landing On Highway Airfield
View: https://youtu.be/Qx7Meo7w-pY
No need to drag people off to a gulag when they voluntarily show up for injections.
For the USAF and the RAF practicing operating on highways tells me, they fear a sudden attack by missiles.
Another coming war sign.
Just to close the loop, the two AASHTO publications I mentioned are the bibles for Interstate highway design geometry nationwide. States can impose stricter standards (e.g. require wider clearances) but it would be a state thing.Looks like your in the VA/WV area, yeah I don't see that happening in either of those states. This is more of a fly over country thing. As others said Ike took this idea out of the german's play book and at the time they wanted runways that were far enough inland that german bombs, if they managed to hit the US, would have a harder time hitting the targets. For those who do not know hitler was working on a super sonic missile system, his goal was to be able to bomb any city in the midwest, and he was pretty close to accomplishing his goal. I'm not sure if the US or if someone else ended up with that tech when germany finally surrendered. He was also very close to having an atomic bomb.
The German Autobahn system, built in the 1930s, was designed to accommodate plane landings, of that day. When Eisenhower was in Germany during and after WWII, he evaluated its dual use - military and civilian - and decided the same for the U.S. - hence, the U.S. Interstate System was brought into being during his presidential term.The old discussion referenced the large aircraft, such as bombers, being too heavy for the depth of the concrete used during road construction. In my searches, I never found in any of my hundreds of historical manuals and documents anything to back this question up. Alfaman, think you could dig up anything?
Picture shows them using A-10s, for practice. What other types of planes may they also test/practice with?The first drill in history is certainly a remarkable event.
Something is up.
Just to close the loop, the two AASHTO publications I mentioned are the bibles for Interstate highway design geometry nationwide. States can impose stricter standards (e.g. require wider clearances) but it would be a state thing.
To bring it down to earth, runway pavements for larger planes (bigger than a Cessna 172) are around 200'+ wide. Additionally, they have "imaginary surfaces" that strictly prohibit structures or obstacles way beyond this width.
A four-lane divided interstate roadway (two lanes each way) typically has two 12' travel lanes or 24' of "full depth" pavement, plus a weaker 4' left shoulder and 10' right shoulder pavement (38' total). Ideally we try to provide a traversable/recovery zone of 30' outside of the 24' travel lanes (else we provide guardrail/barrier) so one could hope for 84' (30+24+30) of relatively level hard-obstacle-free width, though breakaway-post signs are within this zone. More or less, these are nationwide standards.
There very well may be military strategery that has identified certain roads as makeshift landing strips, and the story in the OP may even be legit (though I don't understand what would be gained by it), but I can definitively say that the Interstate road system is not designed with the intent of landing aircraft on them as a federal requirement.
Wouldn’t these location be a matter of national security. I saw reporting on locations.
Wouldn’t these location be a matter of national security. I saw reporting on locations.
So who are the fools that think they need to do this to see if it can be done?
It's what the interstate system was built for originally, for our military's use, not for us peons.
Idea when they built the interstate roads was to have some of it every so many miles so that aircraft could land on it.
This would allow military to have many runways to hide aircraft or places to land them should a military base be destroyed, also allow the shipping of much needed goods and supplies in an emergency which our government has never had to make use of to this day.
So who are the fools that think they need to do this to see if it can be done?
They got it up without turning around.Sure they can land, but now how are they going to get it back up? har har har
I'm thinking of the times that we are in, and the "THEY" that are playing around in so many odd places. Just think of a few recent sayings or actions...
E. Swalwell and his comments...
A lot of the current state and fed officials...
A lot of rhetoric from the "press"...
I'm sure the taliban has a few C130s now that are operational....
I would bet that even Antifa or BLM might have one....
I hope these pilots are taking into consideration their oath and the implications of doing this kind of thing!Local story, but with national implications…
The United States military made history yesterday when it landed a C-130 aircraft on Highway 287 north of Rawlins during a joint training exercise. Moments after sunrise, the cargo plane burst through storm clouds to the east of the roadway at about 240 miles per hour. 500 feet off each wingtip was an A10. Known also as “flying guns,” A10’s are the Air Force’s primary low-altitude close support aircraft. Until yesterday, the Air Force had never landed a C130 on a roadway, although two A10’s landed on a Michigan highway earlier this month. Prior to that, such a feat had only been done in Estonia during the Cold War.
With a wingspan of more than 132 feet, the four-engine C130 is over 97 feet long and has a 42,000 pound payload. It’s manned by a five-person crew including two pilots, a navigator, flight engineer and loadmaster. The US military has used the C130 since 1956 as a troop, medevac and cargo transport aircraft. It is designed for landings and takeoffs on short, unprepared airstrips in combat zones.
Despite gusty winds, a wet road surface, heavy cloud cover and a speed of 120 miles per hour, the pilots set the C130 down perfectly on the centerline of the highway -- making history.
Tune in to Bigfoot99 this morning for all the details on this historic landing and takeoff, or listen here at your convenience: Air Force pilots test landing skills on Highway 287 during military exercise | Bigfoot 99 Radio
Video by Cali O'Hare/Bigfoot 99
(Checked YouTube…not posted there yet…)
FB video of landing…
The United States military made history yesterday when it landed a C-130 aircraft on Highway 287 north of Rawlins during a joint training exercise.... | By Bigfoot99 - KTGA 99.3 FM Saratoga/Rawlins, WY | Facebook
The United States military made history yesterday when it landed a C-130 aircraft on Highway 287 north of Rawlins during a joint training exercise....fb.watch
FB video of takeoff and C-130 being joined by A-10 fighters
Perhaps just as impressive as its historic landing was the takeoff of the C130 on Highway 287 near Rawlins. The energy and wind created by the... | By Bigfoot99 - KTGA 99.3 FM Saratoga/Rawlins, WY | Facebook
56K views, 860 likes, 110 loves, 70 comments, 483 shares, Facebook Watch Videos from Bigfoot99 - KTGA 99.3 FM Saratoga/Rawlins, WY: Perhaps just as impressive as its historic landing was the takeoff...fb.watch
The part of 287 that was used for this test is an extremely straight part of highway…probably 12 to 15 miles arrow straight. Now that the .mil has upped the game on landing large aircraft on non-runway pavement, I expect these “tests” to continue for the foreseeable future…
View attachment 289345
Pretty sure this chosen part of Wyoming’s highway system had NOTHING to do with yours truly.
hold on…someone’s at the d……………….
I hope these pilots are taking into consideration their oath and the implications of doing this kind of thing!
I'm thinking of the times that we are in, and the "THEY" that are playing around in so many odd places. Just think of a few recent sayings or actions...
E. Swalwell and his comments...
A lot of the current state and fed officials...
A lot of rhetoric from the "press"...
I'm sure the taliban has a few C130s now that are operational....
I would bet that even Antifa or BLM might have one....
Yes I know that as well....just hasn't been practiced in a long time why now ? Hhhmmmm?The implication is that our military can use the interstate system as intended, in case of invasion or attack.