I went work at Vought in 1967 when A7A #67 was in final assembly and when we delivered the 60 A7's to the Hellenic AF. Thanks for the memories-- Vought---96 years with airplanes flying aircraft. Wonderful legacy!!!!!
I am really speechless my good friend!Really ,I could never expect to find someone who worked on this Vought`s marvel.And I am deeply moved to read that you were one of the persons who built Greece`s A7s!Especially the last one in the `70s.What can I say!!Thank you very much.You gave us an amazing plane.Sadly it retired a couple of months ago,and it was Greek Airforce the last in the world ,who operated them....I cannot hear them any more...I cannot see them anymore.........Thank you my good friend!:)
Back in the 80’s I remember a pilot at the 185th ANG describing what it was like trying to maneuver the A7 at slow speed, “It’s like a one legged cat trying to cover its shit on an iced over pond.” I’ll never forget that.
This and the A6 were both some great planes. I liked the 7 better than the Tom Cat. Not saying that it was a better plane just liked watching them take off and land on the carrier’s more so.
Wow, I didn't realize that any Air Force still used the LTV A-7s, thought they were all gone when the US Air Force (ANG) retired them in 1993, good to know the Greeks are still flyin them
@@NFA80731 The plane served well with your forces i hope, it may not have been a technological powerhouse, but it was damn tough and could stand up in combat.
@@SSaugaCriss It was made for Close air support. It has to be slow. Even the A-10 thunderbolt is slow. And it even doesn't have a radar. Because it doesn't need it. That time multi role aircraft didn't exist. There were different airplane for each task. Swing wing aircraft could fly at both low speed as well as supersonic. Today's multi role aircraft can do both, they are supersonic as well as they can hit the ground and fly away with great speed. Im not sure if they use laser guided weapons for close air support. If that's true, then laser guided can make things easier.
The good old SLUF (Short Little Ugly Fella). Not the most beautiful aircraft, but pretty proficient and a hell of a lot cheaper to operate than its successors.
Thank you for posting this nice video. well, maybe its "world war II" aircraft but still enough and 100% ready for some "circumstances". Check NATO statistics on who has the best stats (see readiness). btw: its Hellenic Air force, not Greek.
Lets be realistic... They need a structural and electronic upgrade...! EAB can possibly put together a such task.... (improved engine, improve electronics-cokpit and weapon systems, improve structure.... ) The A7 is just like a Lancia Integrale.... old one, good one, but no match for the new racing cars... So if you have something good you try to preserve it...and upgrade it...and keep it up to standards. Lets be realistic gentleman! Lets start talking about upgrades....and higher standards !
I don't think so, the A-7 was replaced by the F-16. The last flyers were the Hellenic Air Force and they retired it this summer. It was slow, it never had an afterburner, s it took forever, like 16 miles to get enough speed after takeoff to climb to altitude.
Charles Damery Your infos had nothing to do comparing A7 with the F16. Yes.It had no afterburner .....and that's how the A7 had ultra long range comparing to the F16. And combine the ''no afterburner ultra long range'', with the weapons load.... that makes the A7 far more superior than any F16 variant, carrying brutal weapon power at long distances while the F16 cannot. And do not forget, that the A7 flies low....under radar detection ... and before the enemy knows what happened ...their airport / base already transformed to hell. The A7 could bring chaos in 1 time, while the F16 to match this result will need 2 or 3 times to do the same. And there in so need to match F16 speed cause it does not need such speed. PS1. The retirement of the Ellenic A7 Corsair was a traitorous action. PS2. The F16 is multirole. The A7 was clearly bomber / attacker. There is no replacement by the F16.
@@Chuck59ish Corsair ii was not meant to fly high but low and deep into enemy territory undetected by enemy radars and deliver its huge deadly load upon them.Turkish airforce was relieved at the news of its retirement.
I would have put after burners on the A7s just so they could take off & climb faster, but would instruct the Pilot's not to use the burners for anything else.
i see so many friends from Turkey........i thought that youtube is forbidden in Turkey a7 is an old aircraft, but just perfect for the mission which we want to execute,low bombing over.....(you know)
the only reason the hellenic airforce still fly these aircraft is because they are still fit to fill in the criteria for a good bomber. Although these planes are old they have amazing maneuverability and capabilitys that even newer bombers have. So why should the greeks retire perfectly good aircrafts?????
I agree, perfect for the role of long distance bombing at low level and close air support for ground troops because of their long range and high payload. flight duration over the battlefield would be measured in hours rather than minuites as with the F16, a totally unsuitable replacement. The A10 thunderbolt would have been a more logical choice. Their retirement, I suspect was mostly due to age and lack of spares. Still they could have played a role in the European airshow circuit where they would have attracted many fans and flight hours kept low.
Δεν μπορώ να καταλάβω γιατί απεσυρθησαν αυτά τα συγκεκριμένου ρόλου αεροπλάνα την στιγμή που και νεωτέρα των F4 είναι τα οποία είναι ακόμα σε χρήση και δεν τα διαθέτουν οι γείτονες.
Τα f4 φέρουν μεγαλύτερο φορτίο και μετάκαυση που το καθιστά υπερηχητικό, η μεγάλη εμβέλεια του α7 μας είναι (σχεδόν) άχρηστη, η μεγαλύτερη του ευελιξία μας είναι σίγουρα άχρηστη όσο υπάρχουν φ16 και μιράζ. Επίσης αν θυμάσαι έχουν γίνει πολλά ατυχήματα λόγω βλάβης με το α7, δίνοντας του μια αρνητική φήμη.
