NAAS Corry Field 1950s

[tgycgijoes]

I would say the one without the guard shack is later. For one thing, the water towers (orange and white) indicate to me that the buildup of the Mainside complex / Corry transition was in progress - the tanks likely indicate the addition of Forrest Sherman Field to the KNPA complex.

Second, as most bases that I am familiar with, base security often reduced the security perimeter so that access was checked at certain buildings and compounds - and base police patrolled the area looking for any vehicle or people who seemed not to belong there (lots of available manpower via the draft in those days!) This allowed much more traffic flow as these facilities multiplied.

The brick building was obviously main security, and issued base stickers and other admin duties.

Just my thoughts -

R/Mike

Guess I'll have to build a guardshack and add it. Not hard to do.

[tgycgijoes]

While looking for more photos of Corry I think that the little house was added in 1964 and that the photo with no little house is earlier because I keep finding later and later photo of the gate with the gatehouse all the way to 1990's so I am going to leave it. I am working on Building 522 the baby....green wooden barracks now as some of the last buildings I am going to add before its read to upload.

[tgycgijoes]

Here is the result of a week's work in the Sketchup Studio:

I thought Building 501 was a challenge:






until I started to design Building 502:


'

[tgycgijoes]

I got these two done. They were the same...but different. Building 522 is larger than Building 524 but otherwise they are painted the same and used the same windows and doors so that wasn't too bad. The stairways are all build from scratch using Sketchup Engineering Lumber and the STAIRMAKER. All are done from photos with a lot of interpretation and study. 522's end units are 182'x32' with a 116'x32' center section and 524's end units are 116'x32' with the same size and design center section.


Here is Building 524:

[Mike71]

Beautiful work - your "splinterville" barracks brings back a lot of memories from my time at Mainside and Saufley. I recall the JO BOQs being a slight pale yellowish. I love the foundation being on those concrete pillars - so realistic!

[tgycgijoes]

Beautiful work - your "splinterville" barracks brings back a lot of memories from my time at Mainside and Saufley. I recall the JO BOQs being a slight pale yellowish. I love the foundation being on those concrete pillars - so realistic!

From what I can gather from reading short notes or photo captions, the BOQ in the 1950's was Building 502 and Admin was Building 501. These green barracks were BEQ or may have been BOQ when there were a lot of NAVCADS stationed here during Korea but there is so little before the 1960's onwards its tough to REALLY know unless like you, someone here on SOH was there back then from after the end of Korea through the 50's. Doin' the best I can and I really appreciate the encouragement and the insight. My ashore time was at NB Norfolk/NAS Norfolk and then Portsmouth Navy Shipyard. Then at home it was either Great Lakes or Glenview.

I have a drive to be as accurate as I can. When I was a shipmodeler, my mentor Howard Chappelle who was curator for the Smithsonian "harped" on being as accurate a possible with a replica. When all the information is gone and your replica is all that exists, it will be looked on by the future generations as historic representation of what it was like. The most challenging were the WWII destroyers. Even Buships plans were sometimes not exactly followed in the hurry in the yards of the time. Many times I had that pointed out to me by the sailor who commissioned me to build a model of his ship when he looked at a drawing and pointed out to me variations on HIS ship. If I could get photos that was the best evidence always. Same holds true for aircraft repaint textures. I have a T-2 post here that illustrates that really well, too.

[tgycgijoes]

Took it a little easy today after all those buildings and built the base bell. Here is the bell i created and below it is the photo I used for reference. I like the way it turned out.

[tgycgijoes]

I am posting 3 pictures here of the aircraft carrier USS ANTIETAM, AT-16 because I had an idea. 3 years ago before I learned how to use Carrier Convoy Planner, I created a cruiser as scenery so that I could launch seaplanes from the catapaults. Its only drawback was that it had no motion but was a static "airport". I did the same thing here with Klaus's Antietam for the specific purpose of being able to have AI Aircraft takeoff from the NAAS and fly out to the carrier and then return to NAAS. AI aircraft will not fly out to an aicarrier and land but they WILL fly out and do "Touch n Go's" on this carrier. They can actually land and then takeoff a short while later. At least that's what it says in small print. I created the carrier tonight and will try it out tomorrow with an AIFP Flight Plan of 4 T-28 Trojan AI Aircraft using Tim Conrad's Trojan. This carrier has a "hard deck" and pendants for arrested landings. I'll post results tomorrow.

[Mike71]

I am posting 3 pictures here of the aircraft carrier USS ANTIETAM, AT-16 because I had an idea. ----

Great idea -I think you have a typo though. ANTIETAM was always CV-36, never redesignated as an AVT, though that was her role in her final years.

USS LEXINGTON WAS re-designated as an AVT in the Reagan Administration as I recall. This was a slight ruse by SecNav John Lehman, who worked diligently to build up the Navy's carrier force to "fifteen deployable" which meant an additional two in either a nuclear refueling overhaul or modernization overhaul, plus one non-combatant Aviation Training Carrier (AVT). This made things somewhat clearer in stating his position before Congress. He was quite successful, though the Navy never quite got there.

As an AVT, LEX had been overhauled with no magazines or combat systems and therefore was not counted in the carrier force structure.

[tgycgijoes]

Great idea -I think you have a typo though. ANTIETAM was always CV-36, never redesignated as an AVT, though that was her role in her final years.

USS LEXINGTON WAS re-designated as an AVT in the Reagan Administration as I recall. This was a slight ruse by SecNav John Lehman, who worked diligently to build up the Navy's carrier force to "fifteen deployable" which meant an additional two in either a nuclear refueling overhaul or modernization overhaul, plus one non-combatant Aviation Training Carrier (AVT). This made things somewhat clearer in stating his position before Congress. He was quite successful, though the Navy never quite got there.

As an AVT, LEX had been overhauled with no magazines or combat systems and therefore was not counted in the carrier force structure.

I have both Antietam AVT-36 and also Lexington AVT-16 in my "shipyard" as ai carriers to use in CCP but as I said and you know, ai aircraft don't land on ai carriers an antithesis. I feel academic this morning...LOL! I researched and Lex relieved Antietam in 1960 so I chose Antietam for my KNCR time period. I have the FP done and am testing it out this morning. TTYL

Richard

[tgycgijoes]

For some reason, when I created the USS Portland scenery with runways on the catapults it worked perfectly and still does BUT and a BIG BUT neither Antietam though it looks pretty and when it didn't work I tried Lexington by a different modeler, neither one works as they should. when the airport carrier scenery is created, the runways stay below the bgl carrier not on the flightdeck which is what they need to do like the catapults. The AI Traffic worked perfectly but when the plane gets withing say 20 miles of the carrier and starts to descend to land, the aircraft disappears. the first time I followed the AI aircraft for an hour and got the carrier in sight....poof! no AI aircraft. FSX goes to tracking the next AI aircraft. I spaced them 5 minutes apart. Then when BOB/I go out to the carrier, either one from "Go To Airport" you end up in the water inside the hull at the waterline. I can start on the carrier on the flight deck when FSX is opened but not from any other airport. Frustrating after hours of work. I thought I had something working here.

[tgycgijoes]

I still want to have AI Aircraft here at Corry Field so I decided that I am going to rewrite the Flightplan in AIFP and have them do TNG's at the various OLF's around Corry and still try and figure out the carrier if it is at all possible in spare time but not hold this up. One more building to go in between Bldg's 522 and 524 the green barracks which is shown on the 1949 bw aerial photo I have been using and used for the taxiway/runway layouts. Interesting while I was following the AI taxiing and taking off yesterday. "ATC" was using Runway 34R/16L with no wind and backtaxied down 16L, turned around at the end and then took off over the top of the next aircraft which it held at the hold short line at the start of 16L. I had problems with the aircraft taxiing and not taking off but just sitting on the runway at the beginning. I went to FSDevelopers through a Google search for why and found out that even though in 1958 there were no "Hold Short" lines here at Corry Field, they HAD to be there for FSX to properly handle AI traffic on an airport so I had to put one in each spot they belonged on a modern airport. Food for thought for designers like at Saufley Field to be sure to include them if you want AI traffic to work.

[Mike71]

Interesting!

[falcon409]

. . . . .I went to FSDevelopers through a Google search for why and found out that even though in 1958 there were no "Hold Short" lines here at Corry Field, they HAD to be there for FSX to properly handle AI traffic on an airport so I had to put one in each spot they belonged on a modern airport. Food for thought for designers like at Saufley Field to be sure to include them if you want AI traffic to work.

Yes, any airport where AI traffic will be used must have hold short lines. You can "hide" the hold short lines by indicating that when you "edit" the hold short parameters. That way the appearance will be that of a period airport.

[tgycgijoes]

Thanks Ed, I didn't know that and will go in and edit all of them. That way they function but are historically accurate. Love your Vermont airport, too.

[tgycgijoes]

While I was looking for more sectionals of the area for OLF's I found this photo over at the abandoned airfields site for Pensacola...check out the tower in the background. I never saw this before only the familiar checkerboards even in the 50's: Also check out the T2V formation. I did a quick check online and was able to find it for FSX as a T1A which is what it was redesignated. Will try it out later in Carrier Convoy Planner and VLSO for fun.

[Mike71]

--- Also check out the T2V formation. I did a quick check online and was able to find it for FSX as a T1A which is what it was redesignated. Will try it out later in Carrier Convoy Planner and VLSO for fun.--

The Seastar was much different from the Navy T-33 originally called a TO-1. The only one I found was really a repainted T-33.

The T2V-1 entered service at NAS Pensacola late in 1957. It performed well as a deck landing trainer, but the boundary layer control system proved to be problematic. It was soon joined in service by the lower powered North American T2J-1 (T-2A) which was used for initial training, with the T2V-1 used for advanced training. It was phased out after the entry into service of the Grumman F9F-8T (TF-9J), which could be used for both deck landing and armaments training.

[tgycgijoes]

The Seastar was much different from the Navy T-33 originally called a TO-1. The only one I found was really a repainted T-33.

The T2V-1 entered service at NAS Pensacola late in 1957. It performed well as a deck landing trainer, but the boundary layer control system proved to be problematic. It was soon joined in service by the lower powered North American T2J-1 (T-2A) which was used for initial training, with the T2V-1 used for advanced training. It was phased out after the entry into service of the Grumman F9F-8T (TF-9J), which could be used for both deck landing and armaments training.

It looks close I thought. I just got Ginter's book on the Seastar so in a week or so I'll have something to compare it with and can add to it or something. Thank you again for insight.

PS I have a 1958 issue Sectional of the area around Corpus Christi that I found really inexpensive on ebay so that I can check out the legend. I trust that it will be close enough to intrepret the Florida ones on the abandoned sites.

[Mike71]

Agreed


"--something's better than nothing, no nothing at all --" Doobie Brothers -What a Fool Believes

[tgycgijoes]

Here are two aerial photos of Corry Field in 1958. I am curious/perplexed about the runway markings and wonder if they are FCLP markings. Any ideas?

There are also just visible and more clear on another photo HOLD SHORT lines though I can't tell if they are exactly like they are now.

[tgycgijoes]

I don't believe that ADEx will be able to mark these like they show in the photo so I am going to create jpgs like I have done for the painted red/white runway markings that are prominent at many airports and I have marked. Interesting markings. I also have 2 more buildings to create this coming week and I will "beta" this out before final and uploading it to the Warbirds Library.

Then I have a couple of the NOLF's from the sectionals/abandoned airfield sites that I think I am going to do because they are so interesting and did "hang around" through the 50's at least though most of them were abandoned and shut down after WWII in 1946. The first one is going to be "the last grass airfield used for Navy fixed wing aircraft". Used by the Navy into the 1960's. Any guesses??? "It was my favorite field for touch & go's in the T-34B when I was in primary training at NAAS Saufley quoted by a Navy Pilot."

[Mike71]

--- wonder if they are FCLP markings. Any ideas?----

I kinda doubt it, though not sure. Bouncing would likely be at an outlying field to avoid the heavily congested traffic. Weird - maybe heavily worn pavement, etc

[tgycgijoes]

What about those wide lines at the beginnings? Takeoff Starts? Couldn't find any information because the UFC 2-000-05N the 100 Series Airfield Specifications I downloaded are from 2012. There is nothing online that is any earlier so no help there. Anyone else wanna jump in here or provide any doc's from the 1950s or even 1960s, c'mon.

[tgycgijoes]

All of the buildings that I believe were on Corry Field when it was an NAAS in the 50's have been constructed either from photos or from similar period buildings (like the barber shop) that no one had any photos of for me to use and were placed according to the 1969 map and the 1950 and the 1960 aerial bw photos (not very clear) so as my friend at church is fond of saying: "it's as good as its gonna git". I am now going to walk around with BOB and check out each one for any glitches and then I'll post it.

[tgycgijoes]

I took a break from Sketchup and scenery today and instead made the first of 10 SNJ textures for NAAS Corry Field for the ai. This was created in Adobe Photoshop for the FSDS SNJ (AT-6) from a photo that I found online with a really interesting article. The pilot who flew it and got his Gold Wings was a USCG Ensign named Arthur H. Wagner. I found the photo attached to a newspaper clipping from his hometown when he was selected as "Student Of The Week" by BTG-2 at NAAS Corry Field. He began training at NAAS Saufley in the T34B he says and then graduated to the SNJ at NAAS Corry. The next post here will have 9 other SNJ's and 10 T-28 Trojans on the flightline waiting to begin training flights.