After reading Capt. Keith Rosenkranz's book Vipers in the Storm I noticed that he had placed his email address in the back cover of the book and so I decided to let him know how much I had enjoyed it. I have personally always wanted to be a combat pilot but poor eyesight kept me out of military pilot training. I try to fill that 'void' through books and combat flight sims.

When Keith replied, one of the first things that I said was: "Thank you for a great and honest book." Why "honest?"

When you sit down and read "Vipers in the Storm" you'll notice that combat pilots are just like you and me: doing their job. Keith was honest in his feelings about when he was called up for duty in the Gulf (and subsequent action) and in his feelings towards his family. THAT was the part that captured my attention and made me "fly" through the book...three times.

Honesty alone did not alone make the book. Keiths writing style was fluid and precise; liberally adding exhaustive details of a Viper pilot's life. There is no bravado and instead, Keith walks you through his experience without any gung-ho talk usually found in other jetfighter pilot book. His patriotism glows from every page as well as his concern for his family, fellow pilots and even the enemy.

This might come as a surprise for most of you, especially during the 'CNN days', but we all have to realize that the Iraqi troops (most of them in Kuwait against their will) suffered heavily becasuse of a ruthless dictator.

Keith shows his humanity when he talks about the first time that he knew that he was about to kill a person. He goes on to describe how he locks up a moving vehicle, a truck most likely, and lets loose the Maverick that completely obliterates it. To this day, Keith wonders about that incident that occurred in the middle of the dark desert.

During all his combat descriptions Keith never once goes beyond his professionalism. He coldly describes his actions like any of us would describe their own jobs. There is no hatred in his words and it shows even more when he describes the shootdown of one of his fellow squadron mates. During that passage the issue at hand was the endangered pilot and not the Iraqi gunner who had managed the kill.

Keith recognizes that the job at hand is not risk free and he acknowledges that he may never see his family again. But through all this he never fails to believe in his country, his mission and his leadership. We should all thank Capt. Keith Rosenkranz for his personal sacrifice and also all the men and women who participated during the Gulf War.

As a final commentary, I would like to thank Keith for taking the time to answer the interview questions. Once again I would like to say that this book is fantastic and gives an excellent insight into the thoughts, feelings and life of a modern combat pilot. Thank you Keith!

Q: How complex are the Viper's weapon systems? What was, in your own personal experience, the most difficult avionics suite to master?

KR: Flying the F-16 is relatively simple. It's a "pilot friendly" aircraft. Mastering the F-16's complex weapons systems is another factor. It takes the average F-16 pilot a year to a year and a half to really feel comfortable with the weapons systems. Most pilots average about 20 hours of flying per month, which equates to about 15 sorties. With that in mind, it's hard to maintain a high level of proficiency when you're only in the air three or four times per week.

Another reason maintaining proficiency is difficult is the F-16's dual-role capability. When you fly a few air-to-ground sorties in a row, your bomb scores improve and you feel like things are coming together. About that time, the scheduler puts you up for a couple of air-to-air sorties. A week may pass before you fly air-to-ground again, so it's easy to see how gaining and maintaining proficiency can be difficult.

In my optinion, the hardest system to master is the F-16's air-to-air radar system. The air-to-air environment is extremely dynamic. You can fly one hundred engagements and never see the same thing twice. Maintaining situational awareness in the high-speed, multi-dimensional air-to-air arena takes time and a lot of practice.

How stable is the Viper at low altitudes? This question is assuming 550+ knots and a moderate combat load.

KR: The F-16 is extremely stable at low altitude in any combat configuaration. The density of the air has a lot to do with that. For a fighter pilot, speed is life. Maneuvering at high altitude burns off energy much quicker than at low altitude.

We generally fly our low levels at 300 to 500 feet, depending on the wingman's level of proficiency. The airspeed between steerpoints is 480 knots and we increase that to 540 knots for the initial point (IP) to target run. The main reason is timing. Preventing an overspeed of certain weapons and stores is another reason.

Mavericks. You mentioned in your book that you needed a refresher course to get familiarized with the AGM-65D. How complex of a weapon system is it? What would be the 'effective' rate-of-fire, in a single pass, that an average Viper pilot could accomplish?

KR: The Maverick missile is an outstanding weapon - my favorite during the Gulf War. Employing it is hard to learn, though. Some F-16 pilots feel it is a switchology nightmare to fire it. Acquiring a target, maintaining situational awareness, and getting the Maverick off the rail can challenge even the best fighter pilots.

We carried two Mavericks during each Gulf War mission. It's possible to fire two during one pass, but I always fired them on seperate passes. I think most F-16 pilots would operate the same way.

Does the Viper have an IFF interrogator or does it rely on the information provided by AWACS?

KR: I flew the F-16C with Block 40 avionics during the war. Our aircraft did not have IFF interogation capability. We relied on AWACS for bogey information.

How effective is the RWR? Did you have any experience with the HARM during the Gulf War?

I have never flown the F-16C Block 50/52 - the aircraft that carries HARMs.

Were any of your squadron mates engaged by SAMs and, if so, how did they evade them? What was your own personal experience with SAMs and AAA fire?

KR: My friends and I were engaged by numerous SAM systems during the Gulf War - SA-2s, SA-3s, SA-6s, SA-7s, and SA-8s. Two pilots were shot down during my second mission to Baghdad when we attacked Saddam Hussein's nuclear research facility. This was the largest strike package of the war - 78 aircraft. I believe they were shot down by SA-6s, though I can't say for sure.

I was engaged by SA-2s and SA-6s during the mission on more than one occasion. The best way to defeat them is to begin a weave plus or minus 45 degrees of your aircraft heading as soon as you get a RWR indication. Punching out a bundle of chaff every other turn is also important.

If the missile continues to guide on your jet, it is imperative that you put it on the beam - turn to place the missile directly off your left or right wing. Prior to impact or detonation, a pilot should attempt to barrel roll around the missile to make it overshoot. A short prayer is also helpful if it gets to this point.

C5 in Kuwait. USAF Photo.

AAA is a different story. The "see and avoid" concept applies here. At night the tracers are easy to see and you just fly around the system. During the Gulf War, the Iraqis usually had their radars off because of the HARM threat. As a result, they usually fired random burst into the air with the hope that they would shoot one of us down. High altitude and the cloak of darkness was always on our side, though, so AAA didn't worrry me much at night.

During the missions to Baghdad, the Iraqis fired higher calliber AAA that would explode around you in black popcorn-shaped clouds - much like the old World War II highlight footage that is often shown in old movies. Putting your bombs on target is your number one priority, so there are times when you just have to suck it up, roll in on the target, and hope the golden bee bee doesn't have your name on it that day .

Your scariest moment during the Gulf War.

KR: My scariest moment during the Gulf War occurred near the end of the war. My wingman and I were flying in the middle of the night in extremely poor weather. The clouds were solid from seven thousand to thirty thousand feet. I didn't even acquire the boom on the tanker until I was within one hundred feet of it.

We were tasked to hit a column of tanks near an airfield called Ali Al Salim, which isn't too far from Kuwait City. Since the weather was poor, I had my wingman drop his ordnance from medium altitude. I had two Maverick missiles, however, which meant I had to drop below the weather to visually acquire my targets.

After firing my first missile, my wingman called to confirm my position. He made a mistake and called out the wrong reference point, though. As the tank exploded beneath me, I looked inside to check my position in the area. A few seconds later, I felt as though something were wrong. The controls were extremely sensitive and there was a lot of noise around the canopy. This was a sure sign that I was approaching the speed of sound. I knew that from my days as a T-38 instructor pilot. A student's first flight in the T-38 was always a supersonic run.

Instinct took over and I looked down at my attitude indicator. I was pointed thirty degrees nose low toward the ground. Our assigned floor was 5,000 feet, but when I looked at the HUD, I noticed my altitude was 1,600 feet. I pulled with all my might and was fortunate enough to live and tell about it. I don't know where I bottomed out, but I learned a valuable lesson that night. Fly the aircraft first and never lose situational awareness.

How many ground targets did you destroy during the 30 combat missions that you flew during the Gulf War? Of those, how many were attributed to the Maverick?

KR: I flew 30 combat missions during the Gulf War. I can't say for sure how many targets I destroyed. I did score ten Maverick missile kills on the "Highway of Death" against Iraqi tanks, trucks, and armored personnel carriers, though.

When you attacked the "Highway of Death", you launched several Mavs into the huge convoy. Do you believe that a Mav impact could have taken out more than one target?

KR: You never fire it into a convoy hoping to take out large numbers. Using the Ground Moving Target Track (GMTT) mode of the F-16s air-to-ground radar system, I would lock up a target and then fly toward it. Lockups usually occurred from a distance of about 30 miles. Once I had a lock, I would ramp down and, once inside of 15 miles, I'd call up my Maverick video. The missiles were boresighted to the radar, so the target was almost always in the Maverick's field-of-view.

After acquiring the target with the Maverick, I would lock it up. Inside of roughly eight miles with a steady pointing cross, I would let her rip. At that point, I was free to egress or go after another target.

Did you ever use the automatic chaff/flare dispenser during your attack runs?

KR: The F-16 has a programable chaff/flare program and our wing had recommended settings for it. We never programmed the flares, though, because firing flares would just highlight your position to the enemy. And, of course, we never had to really worry about heat-seeking missiles being fired at us by Iraqi fighters. If I felt the need to punch out a flare, I would do it one at a time.

Most pilots set the chaff dispenser to "single." Believe it or not, chaff dispensed at night will also highlight an aircraft. I stood on the range one night and had our guys dispense chaff to verify this. After that, most of us always ran in singles, just like the flares.

How difficult is it to identify ground targets from 5,000 feet? 10,000 feet? 15,000 feet?

KR: Target identification is extremely important to a fighter pilot. Some say a good inertial navigation system (INS) is a bomber pilot's best friend. That's a statement I would strongly agree with. If the INS is accurate and you can find your target, putting your bombs on it is that much easier. Target size and the surrounding terrain is also a factor in target acquisition. The lower you are, of course, the easier it will be to acquire the target visually.

Did you ever strafe any ground targets? If so, how effective was it?

KR: Strafing was not allowed in our wing during the Gulf War. It seems like it would be a lot of fun to drop down to low altitude and strafe some targets, but tactically it is unsound. The shells have to be supersonic to have a good effect on the targets, which means you have to fire them from low altitude. Doing this will likely put yourself and your wingman in the heart of the SAM and AAA envelope. Taking a chance on losing a jet or fellow pilot simply isn't worth the effort.

Sounds within the Viper? Sounds from outside of the Viper? Can explosions be heard and, if so, at what altitude approximately?

KR: Sounds inside the Viper are usually limited to what you hear in your headset, i.e., radio calls, RWR indications, the sound of your engine. Nothing can be heard outside the jet.

In your book you describe aerial refueling as if it were a simple task. How difficult exactly is it really? Any tips and/or suggestions for effective aerial refueling?

After the boom is plugged in, I turn my concentration toward the director lights on the belly of the tanker. The lights are automatic and direct you to move up, down, forward and aft. They're designed to keep your aircraft in position while the refueling probe is plugged in.

In fighter squadrons, if you fall off the boom during refueling you owe a round of drinks at the bar to everyone else in the flight. The competition is keen, so being relaxed is important. I used to wiggle my toes while I was on the boom to ease the tension. How's that for a tip?

During your career as a Viper pilot, have you ever experienced G-LOC and how severe was it? What is the 'normal' thresh hold for an average pilot to endure G forces experienced during combat?

KR: G-LOC is always a concern for a fighter pilot, even more so in the highly maneuverable F-16. When a pilot goes into a hard turn and the Gs begin to increase, the blood in your body tends to pool in the lower extremities. Wearing a G-suit and performing what is called an L-1 straining maneuver, will help keep the blood from pooling. Sometimes that isn't enough, though.

As the blood drains from your head, the first thing you lose is the color in your vision. If you don't let off the stick and decrease the amount of G on your body, your peripheral vision begins to deteriorate. You eventually get tunnel vision and everything to the sides turns completely grey. The last thing that occurs before you lose consciousness is a total grey out.

This is where you are still conscious, but can't see anything. If you don't relax the Gs, you are going to go to sleep real quick. If that happens, you have to hope you wake up quickly and have the altitude to recover once you do. I've been in a grey-out situation a few times. Fortunately, I always had the wherewithal to relax the Gs.

Every pilot has a different level of G-tolerance. Light jogging, weight lifting, and a short and stalky build (distance between the head and heart is shorter).. helps increase a pilot's g-tolerance.

What's your opinion of the MiG-29 'Fulcrum' and the Su-27 'Flanker' and their high maneuverability? Do you have any 'insider' information that you could share with us?

KR: The MiG-29 and the SU-27 aircraft are great weapon systems. Both have above average radar platforms and they can maneuver well. Soviet missile technology is also advanced. Disadvantages are poor cockpit visibility - the Soviets never could figure out how to make a bubble canopy, and fuel efficiency.

A friend of mine had an opportunity to fly air-to-air against East German MiG-29s after the reunification of Germany. He said they had to fly quite a distance to reach the airspace near the MiG-29 base. Once they arrived, the MiG-29s took off and the engagements began. After one or two fights, the MiG-29s were out of fuel and had to land. The F-16s fought a couple of more engagements amongst themselves, then flew all the way back to their base.

Viper Pilot in Kuwait. USAF Photo.

Would it be possible for you to compare the Viper and the F/A-18 'Hornet'? Bias aside, which has the less demanding pilot workload?

KR: The F-16 and the FA-18 are two outstanding systems. You should recall, however, that the YF-16 competed against the YF-17, which later evolved into the FA-18, during the mid-1970s. The YF-16 was the superior of the two aircraft and won the competition.

The F-16s and FA-18s of today are much different aircraft. Today's F-16 is more maneuverable than the FA-18, but in a slow speed fight, the FA-18 has the advantage. The reason for this is because the FA-18 can fly at a higher angle of attack. Having a second engine and the added power to go with it is also an advantage the FA-18 has over the F-16.

I've never been in an FA-18, so I can't comment on the differences in pilot workload.

Please take the time to visit Mr. Rosenkranz's Vipers in the Storm website to look at some pretty interesting first hand information. Keith has some awesome plans for his website and I'll keep you folks posted when those changes occur.

If you'd like to drop me a line, please do so.