NAAS Corry Field 1950s
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 60

Thread: NAAS Corry Field 1950s

  1. #1

    NAAS Corry Field 1950s

    I got really excited looking for info for Saufley Field to share with FlyingsCool and found the Abandoned Airfields site for Florida around Pensacola with this in it and thought it would be cool to have it along with Saufley Field so I am getting started on creating it. I want to try my hand at the Main Gate and SODE "Guards" changing from winter and summer uniforms and also my SODE US Flag for naval and military bases.

    In looking at the frequencies correct me if I am wrong...on the line right below the field name are Low and High TACAN channels. According to Google
    Moog Navigation and Surveillance Systems (NaSS) was first established in 1955 and registered its first Tactical Air Navigation (TACAN) patents in 1962. Here is a NAVY Training Film from 1955: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qd9BZc-E668


    i

    I

  2. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by ---
    In looking at the frequencies correct me if I am wrong...on the line right below the field name are Low and High TACAN channels. According to Google
    [I
    Moog Navigation and Surveillance Systems (NaSS) was first established in 1955 and registered its first Tactical Air Navigation (TACAN) patents in 1962. Here is a NAVY Training Film from 1955: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qd9BZc-E668[/I]I
    No - it means airfield elevation, lighted, hard surface, runway length as I recall.

    TACAN stations are set up via channels, not frequencies - easy to use. Look at an IFR chart and you will see paired TACAN / VOR stations and the TACAN channel will be shown as well as the VOR frequency (TACAN is UHF).

    This is a very old chart, as you can see the use of LF radio ranges with their 4-leg beacons in the area, one beacon near Bronson, another near Pensacola (civil). I don't see any VOR/TACAN on this chart. Too bad the legend isn't available - it would be considerably different than a VFR chart today. From all the frequencies in the various boxes, the use of enroute supplements and other resources had not been developed to a high degree.

    The various frequencies are apparently arranged in a standard order and indicate that the various frequencies are at least monitored; 121.5 and 243.0 are the standard VHF/UHF guard frequencies as an example. In this period the military was using both VHF and UHF frequencies for voice comms, UHF particularly in jets, and there were a lot of different type planes, lots of different NAVCOMM arrangements, etc.

    I am curious about the box for Saufley, versus the box for Forest Sherman (the main Navy base in the area - "Mainside" in the common lingo). Saufley has GCA and DF capability (key your mike on command and a DF operator gets a bearing on you). Mainside Pensacola was much more sophisticated, I'm sure they would have had GCA but it isn't shown - maybe just assumed.

  3. #3

    A Lot Clearer

    Quote Originally Posted by Mike71 View Post
    No - it means airfield elevation, lighted, hard surface, runway length as I recall.

    TACAN stations are set up via channels, not frequencies - easy to use. Look at an IFR chart and you will see paired TACAN / VOR stations and the TACAN channel will be shown as well as the VOR frequency (TACAN is UHF).

    This is a very old chart, as you can see the use of LF radio ranges with their 4-leg beacons in the area, one beacon near Bronson, another near Pensacola (civil). I don't see any VOR/TACAN on this chart. Too bad the legend isn't available - it would be considerably different than a VFR chart today. From all the frequencies in the various boxes, the use of enroute supplements and other resources had not been developed to a high degree.

    The various frequencies are apparently arranged in a standard order and indicate that the various frequencies are at least monitored; 121.5 and 243.0 are the standard VHF/UHF guard frequencies as an example. In this period the military was using both VHF and UHF frequencies for voice comms, UHF particularly in jets, and there were a lot of different type planes, lots of different NAVCOMM arrangements, etc.

    I am curious about the box for Saufley, versus the box for Forest Sherman (the main Navy base in the area - "Mainside" in the common lingo). Saufley has GCA and DF capability (key your mike on command and a DF operator gets a bearing on you). Mainside Pensacola was much more sophisticated, I'm sure they would have had GCA but it isn't shown - maybe just assumed.
    Thanks for that! I really appreciate your insights. I am saving this for my future ref.

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by tgycgijoes View Post
    Thanks for that! I really appreciate your insights. I am saving this for my future ref.
    In doing some more research and recollection from my 78 year old brain, A few points from this old map.

    The map has to be post 1951, because Forest Sherman field was commissioned in 1951. Before that, Chevalier Field was NAS Pensacola. Apparently what the Navy did was simply expand the area of Chevelier to build the new Forest Sherman Field, combining both into what is now NAS Pensacola ("Mainside"). Chevalier gradually degraded as an airfield, instead hosting a wide assortment of schools and other functions including the main hospital and Naval Rework Facility (NARF) Pensacola.

    The various schools for both officers and enlisted personnel have bounced around in their location over the years. In my day (1965), what was known as pre-flight schooling for commissioned officers (normally Ensigns out of USNA or ROTC) was held at Mainside. AOCS NAVCADs also had their full course training there. Forest Sherman hosted VT-4 with T-2As for basic carquals for all basic jet students (all were transferred TAD from NAS Meridian). In addition it had a fairly large gaggle of C-47s, C-54s, C-118s, SNBs ad HU-16s. These were typically flown by instructors from all over the Pensacola area to maintain flight time, especially night and instrument time, because teaching ground classes or primary flight at Saufley was not sufficient to keep proficient.

    The various and numerous Navy fields in the area need some illumination. NAAS is an aux airfield. They could host training squadrons but did not have a large administrative capability (hospital, commissary, NEX, personnel departments, etc - maybe just very limited) but came under the umbrella of Mainside. An Outlying Landing Field (OLF) was/is just that - no permanent facilities, just for touch and goes, not even a tower. In some cases special OLFs were for FCLP carrier practice, and LSOs would land there and park. A Navy fuel truck and minimum ground crew would drive out in the morning to fuel and start airplanes involved in FCLPs. A common routine for a student was to make touch and goes until low on fuel, land, shut down and debrief with the LSOs. They would refuel, start and launch into the pattern again, but depart to home field when their fuel was down to Return To Base (RTB) level. This process was common to both VT-4 (T-2s) and VT-5 (T-28Cs). Typical FCLPs were 4 or 6 students at a time in the pattern.

    I got to get a quickie helo transition course as a LCDR prior to going to Test Pilot School - what a deal! As best I recall, there were dedicated helo OLFs - no runways, but designated, numbered grass "blocks" to practice hovering and "squat and go" circuits. I can't remember which ones though.

    If I may digress even more - when I was "bouncing" in VT-4 T-2As, we sometimes used a field called Eglin Aux 6. What was interesting was that it was where the Navy trained Doolittle's B-25 pilots for carrier takeoffs. During inter-period debriefs the LSOs would make sure all of us had a chance to look at a stone mounted brass plaque that memorialized the site. It made quite an impression on all of us.

    Other OLFs were where students (both dual and solo) practiced touch and goes - Saufley (T-34Bs), Whiting (T-28B/Cs) and Ellyson (helos) could not handle the volume required, so these fields were the solution. Patterns in the area used the radio for each field in sort of a UNICOM operation, flying around the area uncontrolled via prescribed course rules. How the hell we never had any mid-airs is beyond me! It was an extremely busy area during the day.

    This is not particularly helpful in your work on CORRY, but perhaps helps narrow down the time frame and general atmosphere the map (and evolution) indicates.
    Last edited by Mike71; October 7th, 2021 at 06:58.

  5. #5

    We're Not Old....yet

    Thank you Mike71 for all of your insight when we do a Navy "something". It gives a reality to the scenery project that would not otherwise be possible because CNATRA is constantly retiring pubs. I was fortunate when I was doing NAS Alameda 5 years ago ( can't imagine it was thank long) that the T34C pubs were still there and I downloaded them and saved them. Now when I want them again they're there. I am doing the best I can with all the photos of Corry Field I can gather and interporlating them picking things out of backgrounds. The runways and taxiways are all complete and last night I finished the basic hanger for the five of them. I had to just assign taxiway designations after studying airfield photos for the runway numbers. Felt like interpreting strike photos to glean a shred of something out of them. To me this is the fun of designing. When its complete (Like Nashua-Boire) its time to move on. Before retiring 10 years ago to here, I was a professional model shipbuilder. Friends in the field as a hobby would build a model and then either sell it or give it away to family or good friends because once it was built "it was time for the next one". I have replaced the creativity of shipbuilding with scenery building and am loving it and learning something new, a challenge, as well. Again, thanks for taking the time for the 78 year old sharing his memories with the 75 year old with his. God bless.

    Richard

  6. #6
    Regarding your mention of T-34C manuals, I have noted that some freeware and payware "T-34Bs" are modeled with 3 blade props - that is not correct. the A and B versions had 2-bladed props. Of course they were recips, the T-34C a turbo with three blades. For those interested, the Carenado MENTOR model is quite accurate IMHO. However, the pilot(s) in the military versions should be wearing a helmet.

    Many Navy T-34Bs were surplus-ed out to Navy flying clubs, some got into civil owner use. I am not sure that there may have been an FAA Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) for a 3-blade conversion of civil registered Mentors, but maybe that may be the cause of a little confusion.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails T-34B by Carenado.jpg   T-34B by Carenado.jpg  
    Last edited by Mike71; October 7th, 2021 at 17:19.

  7. #7

    T-34 Mentors

    I have the Alphasim freeware; Virtavia payware and Carenado payware versions. I do like the Carenado too. The Alphasim is easy to paint but I wish someone with more knowledge than I would do a beautiful VC for it. Its 2D is quite nice but I don't like 2D panels any more. Great for straight forward view but when you get used to the VC to land.

  8. #8

    The Hangers

    I had great success with Sketchup and the hangers yesterday and today at NAAS Corry Field. Here are a couple of screen shots. the runways and taxiways are all in place as are the aprons. I placed the hangers tonight including installing the military beacon on top of Building 516 which has the tower. Next building to tackle is Bldg 501 the Administrative Building which is in the open space between Building 512 and Building 511. I was lucky to find a scale layout of the base though it is after the airfield became the CT School though all the buildings are scaled just no runways or taxiways which I had to do from a BW photo with a lot of measuring and scaling of it.







  9. #9
    VERY Nice!

  10. #10

    The Evolution of Corry Station

    As an interested bystander, I did my own research and found this article on the evolution of Corry Station interesting. There are pictures of buildings taken at various times
    that may or may not of been there in the era of scenery of flight training that you are developing. At the bottom on the link, there is a time line from beginning to current time
    of Corry station. Interesting commentary on the buildings that were dedicated to the base. It was interesting to learn of its transition from a flight training command to Navy
    Crypto School (CTO) aka "Spook" training.

    https://stationhypo.com/2016/03/18/the-evolution-of-corry-station-1922-2016/




  11. #11

    I Saw This

    Quote Originally Posted by gray eagle View Post
    As an interested bystander, I did my own research and found this article on the evolution of Corry Station interesting. There are pictures of buildings taken at various times
    that may or may not of been there in the era of scenery of flight training that you are developing. At the bottom on the link, there is a time line from beginning to current time
    of Corry station. Interesting commentary on the buildings that were dedicated to the base. It was interesting to learn of its transition from a flight training command to Navy
    Crypto School (CTO) aka "Spook" training.

    https://stationhypo.com/2016/03/18/the-evolution-of-corry-station-1922-2016/



    I did run across this but I thank you for the link. It always helps to have another pair of eyes looking for things that I might have missed which happened a lot when doing KASH Nashua Boire. Once I HAD the link I could go back and back for details. I am going to try and add as many buildings as were there up to the base ceasing to be an airfield including the Main Gate my SODE experiment with seasonal uniforms on the gate guards. I have the white gatehouse already with lights from NAS Cecil Field I did.

  12. #12
    I was looking on a nice site about Ellyson; near the end are some great pictures of the standard style hangars in the area and may be of some help on your CORRY project - they look like the same style

    https://members.tripod.com/airfields...ensacola_E.htm

  13. #13

    Same Style Because...

    In the Corry site in abandoned airfields this style hanger was built first there and all the others followed suit in the area so I am sure that is why Ellyson hangers look so similar.

  14. #14
    Good point -

  15. #15

    Airfield Work Continues

    I worked on Building 501 all day yesterday and then again this afternoon. I believe it is coming out quite well. Its really difficult with nothing but Google Earth views now and photos off in the distance which is all there is for the most part. I'm getting pretty good at scaling photos IMHO. This is a photo of the actual building I took off Google Earth of the airfield side which is complete. It will probably take me a few more days until I complete it, this is the EASY side of the building. I also placed the two water towers where they go and have partially done the first portico on the left side with the arches. It is a lot of fun working on it.

    Last edited by tgycgijoes; October 10th, 2021 at 19:52.

  16. #16

    The Main Gate

    Work progressed on the Main Gate today. I am making it as original in the 50's and 60's with some new info I found NOT the current gate as it now appears. The road is different than now as well. I landscaped Building 501 today in ADEx also so that is done and in place.


  17. #17
    Classic look! - Keep it up --

  18. #18

    After All Day

    I managed after Googling all day...to get fx.effect.lights onto the top of the lamp posts at the main gate but sill take some work to figure out how to illuminate the ground. I found a post at FSDeveloper how to use Gmax but as usual me and Gmax don't end up on the same page. So I attached the same effect that Gmax was to use in MDCx but as I said its not on the ground. That's ok. I will work on it. When I get it to work I will attach it to the pillars on the hangers which are supposed to be there. Here is a photo approaching NAAS Corry Field from the highway:


  19. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by tgycgijoes View Post
    I managed after Googling all day...to get fx.effect.lights onto the top of the lamp posts at the main gate but sill take some work to figure out how to illuminate the ground. I found a post at FSDeveloper how to use Gmax but as usual me and Gmax don't end up on the same page. So I attached the same effect that Gmax was to use in MDCx but as I said its not on the ground. That's ok. I will work on it. When I get it to work I will attach it to the pillars on the hangers which are supposed to be there. Here is a photo approaching NAAS Corry Field from the highway:


    I've been quietly watching the progress on this and am amazed at what you've done so far, I like your attention to detail and striving to render as close to period correct as you have
    done. I even like the '55 Chevy. Probably belongs to a young aviator "JG" at the time. I suppose we all had the "chick magnet" car in our younger days Now a days, it's Beemers (BMW) and Mercedes and a 'vette here and there.

  20. #20

    Surprisingly

    Quote Originally Posted by gray eagle View Post
    I've been quietly watching the progress on this and am amazed at what you've done so far, I like your attention to detail and striving to render as close to period correct as you have
    done. I even like the '55 Chevy. Probably belongs to a young aviator "JG" at the time. I suppose we all had our "chick magnet" car in our younger days
    Thank you for the compliment. Mine was a '69 Mustang Convertible my sister drove to high school all the time I was in Vietnam in 1970. Talk about looks in her HS parking lot! LOL! In one of my photos there was a 1955 Chevy so I did a search on Sketchup for a '55 Chevy to stamp the period and found this one that someone did labeled "My Dad's first car". Cool!

  21. #21
    Looks great - maybe a period Studebaker too! (For the older fa_ts) that went through the gate.

  22. #22

    Stupidbaker

    Oooops excuse me. That is what my uncle the Ford man always called them. LOL! If I can find a Studebaker I'll add it. Looked in the "warehouse" and the only one's available are $95.00 not free so sorry, no Studebaker at the gate.

  23. #23

    A little change

    I liked the Chevy at the gate, too, but unless it broke down it shouldn't be sitting there all day so I wrote a SODE XML for it to only be there at 0800-0810, long enough for the guard to check his ID and wave him onto the base. Got some kinda glitch which I've asked for help over at FS Developers because it still is at the gate all the time even though the code checker says the code is OK. More later on this. Also finished the Building 501 Admin building and am about half done with Building 502 which was the BOQ I understand in the 50's. Then I will do a couple of the old BEQ barracks and a couple more buildings and then I think it will be done for the 1950's. The two water towers are placed in proper position, too. They were there since the 40's from the photos I have. Having fun.

  24. #24

    Main Gate NAAS Corry

    Mike71! Here are two photos I have of the Main Gate, both period photos. The one WITH the little house (not On The Prairie LOL) is not dated. 1964 on the other one, with no little gatehouse in the middle. All are snapshots by guys who went to school there. In you 78 year old memory or anyone else who was at Corry in the past, which is correct for 1950's? I also noticed when I uploaded both of these that I need to add Falcon 409's nice STOP sign to the right in front of the brick pillar as you approach the gate. I remember from NTC GLakes and NAS Glenview that you don't stop on the way out just slow down and dim your lights at night. Hence, no stop sign needed.












  25. #25
    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. Also there appears to be a relatively new white structure / garage (?) structure not in the earlier picture. Maybe for Public Works.

    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.

    It also may have been the case that admission to the entire KNPA complex was moved outward to the main complex entrance, eliminating the need for the internal guard shack.

    The brick building was obviously main security, and issued base stickers and other admin duties at one time, perhaps not used for that later on - maybe just info for visitors, etc.

    Just my thoughts -

    R/Mike

Members who have read this thread: 215

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •