615crewdog
F-106 Qualified
Currently: Offline
Posts: 19
Location:
Joined: December 2007
|
Post by 615crewdog on Feb 15, 2009 11:25:18 GMT 9
I was just checking out another F-106 website (http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.asp?aircraft_id=158) and was surprised to see that, at least according to the above website, the six could carry 2 AIM-2's. ;D ;D I worked the Dart for 8 years and never saw weapons troops load more than 1. I wonder just where the other genie was supposed to be loaded? ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by lindel on Feb 15, 2009 11:27:46 GMT 9
Only one Air-2A, 2 Aim 4F and 2 Aim 4G missles. Later 6's also had a gun pod mostly in the weapons bay.
|
|
|
Post by dude on Feb 16, 2009 1:40:25 GMT 9
Don't know where they could have put another rack. The only time I ever saw any A/C with two AIR-2As was a static display of an F-86 with one under each wing.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Feb 16, 2009 4:28:28 GMT 9
Don't know where they could have put another rack. The only time I ever saw any A/C with two AIR-2As was a static display of an F-86 with one under each wing. I came back to the States (Yuma) in '56 as part of the USAFE special weapons competition with F-86Fs and our nuclear weapons were not rocket propelled...........Delivery system/method was LABS or HABS bombs....The F-86 you refer to was it a K,L or M variant ? The Old Sarge
|
|
|
Post by Mark O on Feb 16, 2009 6:53:56 GMT 9
Don't know where they could have put another rack. The only time I ever saw any A/C with two AIR-2As was a static display of an F-86 with one under each wing. You sure it wasn't an F-89J Scorpion? Mark
|
|
Jim Scanlon (deceased)
Senior Staff
FORUM CHAPLAIN
Commander South Texas outpost of the County Sligo Squadron
Currently: Offline
Posts: 5,075
Location:
Joined: July 2007
Retired: USAF NBA: Spurs NFL: Niners MLB: Giants NHL: Penguins
|
Post by Jim Scanlon (deceased) on Feb 16, 2009 6:55:28 GMT 9
I think the B One R D referred to may be the F89J. It had a Genie under each wing. It was also capable of having two Falcons under each wing. The tip tanks were changed to be strictly fuel tanks, holding 600 gallons. Hope that helps.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Feb 16, 2009 8:20:28 GMT 9
The Genie was originally designed for the F-89 - variant unkn by me..... the 465 (not 456th)th FIS (later to become the 49th FIS) had several variants that carried the genie - most still carried 104 FFNR.........The Old Sarge
|
|
|
Post by Cougar on Feb 16, 2009 8:32:11 GMT 9
The F-101-B also carried two Air-2As. :green-beer :drunk :green-beer
|
|
sixerviper
F-106 Skilled
Currently: Offline
Posts: 209
Location:
Joined: July 2007
|
Post by sixerviper on Feb 17, 2009 13:27:26 GMT 9
Seems to me "AIM" 2A is a misnomer. The Genie was an unguided rocket, so it was the "AIR-2A" for "Air Intercept Rocket". A missile is a rocket with a guidance system, as in "AIM 4, AIM-9", etc. Correct me if I'm wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Cougar on Feb 17, 2009 13:36:00 GMT 9
Seems to me "AIM" 2A is a misnomer. The Genie was an unguided rocket, so it was the "AIR-2A" for "Air Intercept Rocket". A missile is a rocket with a guidance system, as in "AIM 4, AIM-9", etc. Correct me if I'm wrong. Good catch I should have picked up on that because our standard response for what a 6 carried for weapons was 4 GAMs and a GAR. Kept the Civvies confused.
|
|
dnbeven
F-106 Skilled
Currently: Offline
Posts: 146
Location:
Joined: November 2007
|
Post by dnbeven on Apr 15, 2009 15:10:42 GMT 9
Having worked weapons release, gun shop and as a load toad on the Six, I can verify only one AIR-2A per 106. Only one MB-1 rack per 106 which held the AIR-2A. In place of the AIR-2A a 20mm M61-A1 Vulcan Cannon could be carried. OH HOW I MISS THE GOOD OLD DAYS!!!
:fire_missle_ani
|
|
rocky1775
F-106 Qualified
Currently: Offline
Posts: 5
Location:
Joined: November 2010
|
Post by rocky1775 on Jun 13, 2016 14:07:08 GMT 9
Would the Genie detonate if it actually hit something? Besides the obvious possibility of hitting a bomber, if it was launched against a low altitude target and impacted the ground, would it detonate, or just smash itself to bits? What if the rocket motor failed to ignite?
Its often the case that weapons are used against things they were never intended for. IR homing AIM missiles have been known to have been used against trucks in Vietnam. I imagine a Genie could take out a bridge or a ship if it would actually detonate when it hit.
|
|
|
Post by LBer1568 on Jun 13, 2016 23:44:47 GMT 9
Would the Genie detonate if it actually hit something? Besides the obvious possibility of hitting a bomber, if it was launched against a low altitude target and impacted the ground, would it detonate, or just smash itself to bits? What if the rocket motor failed to ignite? Its often the case that weapons are used against things they were never intended for. IR homing AIM missiles have been known to have been used against trucks in Vietnam. I imagine a Genie could take out a bridge or a ship if it would actually detonate when it hit. The MB-1 was an unguided rocket. It had safety features to prevent inadvertent detonation. The rocket motor would not fire unless a landyard pulled a pin during it's drop from missile bay. Then the engine would fire. The MA-1/AN-ASQ25 would set the parameters for rocket at C time during launch. That set the most important parameter the "Time of flight" before detonation. The warhead had to have all of the right parameters as well as pull 4 g (as I recall) before another pin was pulled allowing nuke detonation after time of flight. It took all of these to allow for detonation. So the guy on ground with a hammer pounding on warhead would not set it off, nor would hitting something before it's time of flight. Correct me if I missed something Lorin
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Jun 14, 2016 0:27:27 GMT 9
Would the Genie detonate if it actually hit something? Besides the obvious possibility of hitting a bomber, if it was launched against a low altitude target and impacted the ground, would it detonate, or just smash itself to bits? What if the rocket motor failed to ignite? Its often the case that weapons are used against things they were never intended for. IR homing AIM missiles have been known to have been used against trucks in Vietnam. I imagine a Genie could take out a bridge or a ship if it would actually detonate when it hit. The MB-1 was an unguided rocket. It had safety features to prevent inadvertent detonation. The rocket motor would not fire unless a landyard pulled a pin during it's drop from missile bay. Then the engine would fire. The MA-1/AN-ASQ25 would set the parameters for rocket at C time during launch. That set the most important parameter the "Time of flight" before detonation. The warhead had to have all of the right parameters as well as pull 4 g (as I recall) before another pin was pulled allowing nuke detonation after time of flight. It took all of these to allow for detonation. So the guy on ground with a hammer pounding on warhead would not set it off, nor would hitting something before it's time of flight. Correct me if I missed something Lorin Not that I am aware of Lorin. The many hours of training that I went through to become a load chief (against my will, what with all the pro-pay and EARLY promoted people we had in the squadron), we were taught that even if, some how the lugs or hooks should fail after it was hung and it should fall, the primary concern was for damage to the weapon, NOT detonation. I started out as an augmentee leader that opened the coffins and attached the handling cradle to the missiles. As a TSgt, I was the highest ranking laborer during mass loads, then I became the highest ranking load chief, augmentee or genuine weapons guy. For f89 guy, Did you get in touch with Ralph concerning getting the Genie off his F89? You never mentioned it.......
|
|
rocky1775
F-106 Qualified
Currently: Offline
Posts: 5
Location:
Joined: November 2010
|
Post by rocky1775 on Jun 17, 2016 15:54:42 GMT 9
It sounds like the best tactic for the target bomber would be to fly at the Genie and hope he collides with it before the end of the timed flight, and hope the impact does more damage to the missile than it does to the bomber. Not easy to do, I'm sure, but maybe easier than getting out of its kill zone. Tom Clancy did it with torpedos in Hunt for the Red October. It would be an interesting debriefing: "The target survived because the missile hit it."
Sinking a ship with a Genie might work. There would be a 50-50 chance that the time of flight to the target would be less than the calculated flight time. If the actual flight time is longer, the missile hits the target (or water) and the Genie breaks. But if its shorter, there would be a detonation, probably disabling the ship, even if it didn't actually sink.
If the rocket failed to ignite, I expect hitting the ground would be more than 4 gs. Did the 4 gs have to be from a forward acceleration?
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Jun 18, 2016 0:22:29 GMT 9
It sounds like the best tactic for the target bomber would be to fly at the Genie and hope he collides with it before the end of the timed flight, and hope the impact does more damage to the missile than it does to the bomber. Not easy to do, I'm sure, but maybe easier than getting out of its kill zone. Tom Clancy did it with torpedos in Hunt for the Red October. It would be an interesting debriefing: "The target survived because the missile hit it." Sinking a ship with a Genie might work. There would be a 50-50 chance that the time of flight to the target would be less than the calculated flight time. If the actual flight time is longer, the missile hits the target (or water) and the Genie breaks. But if its shorter, there would be a detonation, probably disabling the ship, even if it didn't actually sink. If the rocket failed to ignite, I expect hitting the ground would be more than 4 gs. Did the 4 gs have to be from a forward acceleration? Best I can recall, (almost 60 years ago is a LONG time) the Genie was a proximity type of weapon in that it didn't have to hit any thing to explode, the concussion and the heat generated would take care of anything in its range.If the motor failed to ignite, a step in the sequence was missing and it would be in a "fail Safe" mode. Hypothetical questions seem to reappear, but they generate some response.. The Old Sarge
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Jun 18, 2016 0:27:54 GMT 9
rocky, I drug this from Lorin from another topic for you..... The old sarge... I guess you missed the main part of the time of flight. The normal time of flight was 6 sec. The enemy bomber would not even have time to react to a minimum time of flight attack. The escape procedure for the F-106 after deploying MB-1 was to do snap roll and pull max G pull to get started on turning away from blast. The six would then ride the shock wave away from blast like a giant surf board. Most pilots figured it was a last ditch hope to not be part of blast. Probably a good thing the six never fired a live MB-1 Genie. Lorin
|
|
f101b
New to the Flightline
Currently: Offline
Posts: 1
Location:
Joined: June 2016
|
Post by f101b on Jun 18, 2016 23:48:57 GMT 9
The AIR2-A. Time of flight was from 6 to 8.5 seconds. Parameter set by charging a capacitor bank. The concept was that bombers flew in groups, and that a detonation in a group would be very effective. The weapon would be useless for ground targets.To watch the only live fire of a Genie, go to You Tube type in Genie missile test. There is also a video of a Genie fitted to an F-104.(Really strange setup). A lot of great videos of nuclear tests. I used to repair MSR's (McDonnell Simulator Rocket) in radar mock up. I was a 32271H ( MG- 13 MG-10) systems computer specialist. 78th A&E Hamilton AFB. 1961-1965.The unit would record the signals from the FCS. Time of flight, F1 and F2 fire signals and supply voltages on polaroid film. It could record up to 4 passes. This was on F-101B's, same MSR used on sixes. Most intercepts using Genies were snap-ups, easier break away from intercept. .(everyone had a camera, free film!)
|
|
zipper730
F-106 Skilled
Currently: Offline
Posts: 214
Location:
Joined: September 2016
|
Post by zipper730 on Oct 3, 2016 0:29:41 GMT 9
Post Deleted
|
|
zipper730
F-106 Skilled
Currently: Offline
Posts: 214
Location:
Joined: September 2016
|
Post by zipper730 on Oct 3, 2016 5:14:08 GMT 9
I made a mistake, I edited the post by the way.
|
|