MOW
Administrator
Owner/Operator
Currently: Offline
Posts: 5,822
Location:
Joined: September 2003
Retired: USAF, Civil Service
|
Post by MOW on Mar 12, 2007 19:52:55 GMT 9
, son of F-106 pilot Ltc Roy Camblin Jr, is looking for information. Below is the e-mail he sent to me in its entirety. Hope some of you guys can help him out. ********************************* Subject: F106 Fact Confirmation Help, Please Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2007 22:53:48 -0400 From: pcamblin@nortel.comTo: mcgeepj2@hotmail.com I’m hoping you can help me with something. I’ve recently been moved to write a short tribute (with no intention of publication) to my father, long deceased, using his old flight jacket as the vehicle of its telling. There are some historical references, taken from my youthful impressions of his work during his life and over the years since, which after some research I’m not sure are accurate. Basically, can you confirm or correct my impressions of the general day-to-day content of my father’s work? He was Ltc Roy Camblin Jr., flying F106’s out of Dover AFB from 1966 into 1968 ( 95th FIS “Mr. Bones”). Here are my impressions, and the conflicts: 1. Impression: Very long missions, involving multiple refuels, on station above the polar ice cap, patrolling circuits at altitudes of up to 60,000. - But I read that the typical intercept was 1 to 2 hours long, which doesn’t seem long enough to get over the ice caps.
- However, that article is itself contrary to other publicly available information of which I’m aware, e.g. the air-refueling capability, involvement in maintaining the “dew line”, intercepting Russian bombers inbound over the caps BEFORE they hit Canadian airspace, etc.
- Were there different mission profiles that would explain the divergent information? I remember the “ready ramp” with pilots sleeping next to a pair of ‘sixes, who would scramble to make intercepts. Perhaps these were ad hoc missions of shorter duration, while longer, pre-planned patrols were flown north of Canada?
2. Impression: The MB-1 had a killing radius measured in miles - But I read that the Genie had an effective lethal radius of 1000 feet
- However, this doesn’t jive with the arcing flight path I’ve read the ‘Six flew as part of the Genie launch sequence, in order to clear the area as quickly as possible. The Genie had a 6+ mile range, and at the speeds the Six flew, and three football fields doesn’t seem like a very large radius
3. Impression: These pilots were without navigational aids, and had to fly the longer missions with sextant and the stars - But I read that the Six had a very sophisticated automatic guidance system that would make celestial navigation wholly unnecessary
- Perhaps the older pilots, in earlier aircraft had to navigate by the stars? I know in WWII my dad flew C47’s over the “Burma Hump”
Your help in this would be greatly appreciated. I’d hate to share the tribute with my older brother (former ‘70’s era AF fighter pilot) and have it fall apart factually. Kind Regards,
|
|
|
Post by John Bartoszewicz on Mar 16, 2007 1:46:25 GMT 9
Dear Pat, let's see if I can help you out!
1. Impression: Very long missions, involving multiple refuels, on station above the polar ice cap, patrolling circuits at altitudes of up to 60,000.
Answer: Your father was a Ltc, at Dover with 1 Squadron the 95th, he was probably the CO. His flying time was to get his flying hours. Day hours, night hours, day-night takeoffs, approaches and landings and the different profiles.
As a Maj, it was as above, but at least once a day and Alert rotation.
As a Capt it was 1 to 2 times a day.
As a First Lt it was usually twice a day.
As a 2nd Lt after qualifying at Tyndall in the Six, his job was to fly the T-33 target and get shot at. This was to get his number of flying hours up, get him experienced with flying a set profile, simulator time and hitting the books.
The typical mission was 1-2 hrs with drop tanks, but realize that prior to late 66, the Six did not have IFR or Super Sonic tanks. If there was a plan to fly over the Ice Caps, it was from a forward deployment base, take off and landing in Canada. After late 66, we had In Flight Refueling and Super Sonic Tanks, that took nothing away from the A/C performance. Typical sortie time could now be 3 hrs. With IFR the mission started to change. With everything else a pilot now had to practice with a tanker, hooking up without fuel transfer to partial to full transfers. 8 hr missions were flown, going no where, eating and drinking to a minimum, peeing into a zip-lock bag with a compressed sponge inside and holding your bowels. The Russians as far as I know never came over the cap, but liked to exercise in International airspace and test Alaskan defenses. The other route was close to Iceland and down the East Coast of the US to Cuba.
The Six at maximum Mach could drain the fuel onboard in 12 to 15 minutes, so it was not pedal to the metal, too often. Then there was the sonic boom that upset everyone, so super sonic flights was limited. While Zooms above 50K were done, they were prohibited by regulations and you really should have a pressure suit.
The J75 could keep you above 40K but as you approached 45K, you had to pop the burner to maintain altitude. In burner the fuel guage started to race toward empty and you had to land with 600 pounds of fuel left.
2 Sixes were always on 5 Minute Alert with missiles only and a good pilot, when asleep, could get airborne in 4 minutes. There were usually 2 to 4 birds on 15 minute Alert with the Genie. These pilots had greater freedom of movement because the Alert Status would have to go up prior to launch.
2. Answer: The fireball of the MB-1A was about 1,000 ft. There was a more powerful MB-1B later on, much more powerful, but no-one can tell you if or when this happened. The idea was not to hit the target, but to get close. The fireball was instant inciniration, then there was a larger zone of concussion and radiation and then a much bigger zone of concussion. So you see why the pilot wanted his bottom or backside, going away real fast. In debriefing the intercept film was processed and reveiwed. This was 16mm film running at 16 frames per second. The projector could single step. At the first frame that had the 8 ball (pull out signal), you counted 8 frames. If the wings were not rolled out putting the bottom of the Six at the blast in 1/2 second, the bird and pilot were considered dead.
Answer 3. The Six had a very sophisticated Navigation System for its time. It was mainly based on TACAN (Tactical Air Navigation). TACAN gave range and bearing to your landing field. When TACAN malfunctioned the SCRG (Stable Co-ordinate Referece Group), if it had 20 minutes of valid TACAN, would dead recon, fairly accurately for 20 minutes. Then there was the Direction Finder that could lock on to a UHF signal and display the bearing to base. We also had a map and compass. NO sextant.
If you dicuss this with an F-4 person, the F-4 was better under 10K. Under 10K all he had to do was sucker you into some high "G" turn and get you to bleed off your airspeed. Above 10K the Six was better and the higher the better.
In the early 70's, against F-14's and F-15's, in a guns dogfight the Six could make them blow an engine at 40K.
Hope this helps, and I am sure some other member will now post his opinion. Black Bart :yellowbeer:
|
|
MOW
Administrator
Owner/Operator
Currently: Offline
Posts: 5,822
Location:
Joined: September 2003
Retired: USAF, Civil Service
|
Post by MOW on Mar 16, 2007 8:35:57 GMT 9
Good stuff Bart. I will pass this entire message on to LtCol Camblin's son Patrick and hope it helps him.
Hey, how come you're logging on as a Guest? Didn't you register at one time as a Member? You should.
|
|
|
Post by Patrick Camblin on Mar 16, 2007 9:35:32 GMT 9
Thank you, Pat for posting these questions, and thank you Bart for your thorough explanations, which I'll incorporate to correct some some clear inaccuracies in the tribute. There's quite a lot in your post, and I want to digest it, to ensure I do justice to the time you put into it.
With Kind Regards Patrick Camblin
P.S. The paths to your site must surely be many. While I'd intended to take up your recent invitation to post here when the thoughts are successfully captured, tonight's visit (my first) was serendipity. You know how to get a passer-by's attention, r.e. your initial post in Dad's name...
Again, thanks
|
|
MOW
Administrator
Owner/Operator
Currently: Offline
Posts: 5,822
Location:
Joined: September 2003
Retired: USAF, Civil Service
|
Post by MOW on Mar 16, 2007 12:35:28 GMT 9
Thank you, Pat for posting these questions, and thank you Bart for your thorough explanations, which I'll incorporate to correct some some clear inaccuracies in the tribute. There's quite a lot in your post, and I want to digest it, to ensure I do justice to the time you put into it. With Kind Regards Patrick Camblin P.S. The paths to your site must surely be many. While I'd intended to take up your recent invitation to post here when the thoughts are successfully captured, tonight's visit (my first) was serendipity. You know how to get a passer-by's attention, r.e. your initial post in Dad's name... Again, thanks Welcome Pat. Fell free to register as a member if you wish, you're more than welcome. Keep your eyes peeled here for more posts. Pat
|
|