RpR
F-106 Qualified
Currently: Offline
Posts: 16
Location:
Joined: January 2013
|
Post by RpR on Feb 21, 2013 15:07:51 GMT 9
The F8U-3 used a J75 that had over 29,000 lbs thrust. Does anyone know what was different, and had this engine been in the six, how would it have changed any performance perameters?
As another person asked in a different thread, when and why was the anti-reflection paint changed from the scalloped form to the same one the deuce used.
A former pilot said in another thread that the six could go mach 2 for approximately fifteen minutes, is that with the drop tanks or without?
How fast could a six go at under one thousand feet altitude if for some reason it had to get some where or away post haste?
How much potential did the J75 have in it for more thrust had turbo-fans not taken over?
would an F100 or F110 fit in the six?
Why would the six not turn well at high altitude?
Where was the mission border for the sixes from Minot and Duluth?
Duluth was and still is my favorite vacation city in Minn. When I was a teenager my dad and I would go up there to watch the boats and sixes.
|
|
|
Post by Mark O on Feb 22, 2013 2:35:22 GMT 9
As another person asked in a different thread, when and why was the anti-reflection paint changed from the scalloped form to the same one the deuce used. Probably some TAC General decided on it!! It was late in the F-106 career (~1982-1983) when they changed it anyway. However, if you look some very early photos of the Six, Convair painted the anti-glare panel just like the Duece.Where was the mission border for the sixes from Minot and Duluth? On a map? Grand Forks Air Defense Sector. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Grand_forks-ADS-map.png
_welcome
|
|
|
Post by LBer1568 on Feb 22, 2013 3:05:14 GMT 9
A true Mission Boundry for any Inteceptor would be fuel restriction. Normal Flight Parameter boundries are different than "War time" scenerios.
|
|
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 22, 2013 6:19:24 GMT 9
A true Mission Boundry for any Inteceptor would be fuel restriction. Normal Flight Parameter boundries are different than "War time" scenerios. One thing that was not mentioned in the Wiki piece, is the overlap of sectors. Every ADIZ was overlapped by the ones around it. When I was at The SCAB, our Saber Dogs would regularly cross in to the other zones, as did the birds from Duluth, Great Falls, Rapid City, Chicago, Minneapolis, Kansas City and Madison. When I was at The Goose, our planes crossed over in to Thule, Iceland, Newfoundland and Maine zones. The current Zones are only around the national and Canadian borders. With no interceptor squadrons, they have a mix of ANG and AF F-15s and F-16s doing the job. The Navy deals with offshore zones, excep Hawaii, which is joint AF and Navy/Marine. However, all they have is the F/A-18, with not very much range. I like the old system. Question raised about the F8U-3. According to Wiki, the Crusader III was measured at Mach 2.39, at 50,000 feet. However, only 8 were built, so it was never an operational fighter. It would have been an interesting race between it and the Six. Seems McDonald had more pull with the bomber generals and battleship admirals, who wanted a two-seat plane. So, the F-4 won out. I don't know what the prejudice was against single-seat fighters, but it seems the Six and Thud did pretty well with only the driver. The F8U-3, had 4 20mm cannons, and pre-planned for a Gatling gun. However, the Puzzle Palace decided cannons and machine guns were weapons of the past, and rockets/missiles were the only way to go. So, not far in to the Nam thing, the F-4 was being set up for a center line gun, then a nose mounted gun, along with the bay mounted gun in the Six. So much for the whiz bangs inside the Beltway. I suspect we are seeing a large amount of that kind of "intelligent" "thinking", when it comes to the F-22 and F-35. Give us the technology and lots of goodies to play with. But, don't you dare give us a flying machine that will do the job, and do it simply. With their "thinking" the F-16 and the A-10 would never have gotten past the planning stage. Jim Too
|
|
|
Post by adart on Feb 22, 2013 8:07:27 GMT 9
Duluth is our fav. vac. spot in Minn. Still have friends who live there.
|
|
RpR
F-106 Qualified
Currently: Offline
Posts: 16
Location:
Joined: January 2013
|
Post by RpR on Feb 26, 2013 14:21:08 GMT 9
Any one else out there with info or insight?
Sadly a few years ago there was a sight that gave far more information on P&W engines. I remember it listed a J57 that put out 20,000 lbs.thrust. I thought it was actually the company P&W site but what ever it was, it is gone now.
|
|
Deleted
Currently: Offline
Posts: 0
Location:
Joined: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 27, 2013 0:43:24 GMT 9
|
|
RpR
F-106 Qualified
Currently: Offline
Posts: 16
Location:
Joined: January 2013
|
Post by RpR on Feb 27, 2013 5:34:44 GMT 9
Thanks but that is not quite what I was looking for. I mentioned the J57 because some years back when I found that, I was just curious, at that time, how far they had pumped up the J57 before they stopped using it. (I believe the French were still then flying the F-8) The site had a long listing of jet engines and the types developed of each one. I figured, that site, if it still existed, would have had info on what was done with the J75 also but it no longer exists. I searched the wiki, for all it has, which while nice is actually quite lacking in details often. I did find the variant number of the J75 used in the F8U-3 but a search of the net brought up zero information of the sub-type. J75-P-5A engine generating 29,500 lbsI am curious what that engine, which most often is listed at 29,500 lbs. thrust, would have done to the F-106 performance parameters, plus why it had so much more oomph, plus how much more development the J75 had left in it had they continued to develope the six. The gents here are the ones who lived with the aircraft and their engines so I figured this is the best place to see who knew or knows what. --------------------- On a side note, could the J75 have been installed in the F-102 if they had wanted to? I know it is not like changing engines in a car, but Israel put the J79 in the Mirage so I am just curious.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Feb 27, 2013 10:41:46 GMT 9
The F-102 was intended to have the -75, it wasn't available-the rails to remove/install the 57 had extenders on them so the rollers on the 57 would fit on the rails.....
|
|
|
Post by Mark O on Feb 27, 2013 10:58:54 GMT 9
Hello "rpr"! Guess you missed the answers that the Old Sarge posted. Several of your questions were answered, but the forum got the best of him (and me; truth be told!) Let's see if I can remember some of the answers... Supersonic with external tanks? Yes, the tanks were supersonic rated. Check out some of the photos of the "early", subsonic tanks on the main page. They are why you see a lot of early photos of the Six without external tanks. Flying under 1,000' AGL was generally frowned upon (still is), so there wasn't any real testing done. Besides, if you were flying down that low you were either taking off, landing, in a C-130 (ask me how I know!), or in deep kimchi! Potential? There's a loaded question! (What if a frog had wings?) F100? F110? I think I know where you are going with that. By the time those engines came out advances in electronics, and everything else were such that it wouldn't have made economic sense to upgrade the few Sixes left. Turning at altitude? Wing loading, air density, aircraft design, stuff like that. A former Six pilot that visits here explained it very well once, but I can't find the post right this second. Anyway, regarding the engine, it's all really academic now of course. You seem to have done some research, that's for sure. I suppose a number of reasons come into any issue when the question, "Why?" comes in. Money is usually a good answer. Production, contracts, flight testing, fuel capacity-and-economy, etc., and those are just a few reasons. That of course comes back to the "why". So what sparked your interest anyway? Are you an old engine guy, or just curious? Tell us a bit about yourself! Again, welcome to the forums! Edit: Oh yea. Israel, the Mirage, and a J79? Think international politics. Israel has always done what they've HAD to do, and they know who their real friends are.
|
|
|
Post by pat perry on Feb 27, 2013 13:26:04 GMT 9
|
|
RpR
F-106 Qualified
Currently: Offline
Posts: 16
Location:
Joined: January 2013
|
Post by RpR on Feb 27, 2013 13:42:46 GMT 9
Gentlemen: I am not a ex-military. When my draft number was called I was in the hospital with my skull cracked from ear to ear. I am normal now but I sure wish those pixies would stop flying around my bed at night!
My interest came from, as a small youth through teenage years, I would often go camping up at Duluth at Jay Cooke State Park and trips to the airport to watch the fighter planes take off was a mandatory part of the trip. (I read well at a very early age and my parents gave me books about airplanes, of which the Six is the one that made me go WOW!) I am old enough, I remember well, the old wooden bridge, with a T intersection, that used to cross over the railroad yard to get down to the watch the ships. Some things from one's youth can be permanently cemented into one's psyche as a favorite forever. The Six is that for me to the point that there will never be a better plane period, ever, although delta wing planes as a whole, again this is from a childhood intrigue, have always fascinated me more than others. As the old saying goes coulda, woulda, shoulda for the Six will probably intrigue me till the day I die.
I was more than slightly pleased when I found that a site dedicated to the plane, and those who flew and maintained it, existed.
If I was not in a world of hurt right now, I would try to beg, borrow or steal some way of getting into that reunion, even though I am just a kid, in my mind anyway, who is still in love with the the Six.
Bob
|
|
|
Post by adart on Feb 28, 2013 1:21:01 GMT 9
Hey RPR didn't the old wooden bridge connect Duluth with Superior Wisc. I was stationed in Duluth in the late 60s and remember going over that bridge. I was thinking it hinged in the middle to let boats pass thru.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Feb 28, 2013 1:38:55 GMT 9
rpr, welcome onto our flight line and into our hangar.. I deleted my response to your firtst post- accidently... If you would like answers, let me know... Excuse the slight sarcsim and the reference to robync who was a troll.... The F-106 was and still is a very infectuious aircraft......The Old Sarge
|
|
RpR
F-106 Qualified
Currently: Offline
Posts: 16
Location:
Joined: January 2013
|
Post by RpR on Feb 28, 2013 14:25:57 GMT 9
Hey RPR didn't the old wooden bridge connect Duluth with Superior Wisc. I was stationed in Duluth in the late 60s and remember going over that bridge. I was thinking it hinged in the middle to let boats pass thru. You are thinking of the old Highway 2 Arrowhead Bridge that was replaced by the Bong Bridge. It connected to the wooden cause way that crossed the railroad yards. I do not think anyone that goes to Duluth now could even imagine what it used to be like. Someone stole the big chunk of copper, hundreds of pounds, that used to be by the lift-bridge Coast Guard building. No one has any idea how it happened or when. I still miss Goldfines.
|
|
|
Post by adart on Mar 1, 2013 7:49:33 GMT 9
As the ad stated Goldfines by the bridge. Shopped there many a times.
|
|
|
Post by jimpadgett on Mar 2, 2013 7:24:44 GMT 9
Got my Honda parts from the dealer across the street from Goldfine's. The old elevator bridge was still there a couple of years ago. But you are right, rpr, I hardly recognized the place after 44 years away.
|
|
RpR
F-106 Qualified
Currently: Offline
Posts: 16
Location:
Joined: January 2013
|
Post by RpR on Mar 3, 2013 2:58:30 GMT 9
If you are driving into Duluth, do yourself a favor. Take either State 23 in , or County 61 (the old U.S. 61) it is a far nice drive than the boring Interstate.
In the past ten years though, on 23, the little villages that have town names, although they were just a few buildings, have all gone belly-up. They were often a nice stop to go through a junk shop, or catch a better than average burger and beer. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Addendum: I only know of two Canadian Air Bases Cold Lake and Moose Jaw, were you boys responsible for stopping intruders probing Hudson Bay?
I saw a picture recently of a 5th FIS F-15 escorting a Russian Bear. How did that come about?
|
|
|
Post by adart on Mar 3, 2013 6:56:00 GMT 9
Yes we take Hwy23 or take the Wisconsin side and cross thru Superior...
|
|
|
Post by Mark O on Mar 3, 2013 12:51:41 GMT 9
Question 2 -- REALLY big external tanks! No, seriously most FISs had detachments scattered all around. That's probably it.
|
|