delta2477a
F-106 Skilled
Currently: Offline
Posts: 101
Location:
Joined: August 2005
|
Post by delta2477a on Aug 6, 2005 5:47:16 GMT 9
In 1962,
A fly-off was done between the F-106A and the F-4H-1 (The F-4B Phantom)...
Called Operation High-Speed...
The F-4 was said to be faster, higher flying, and longer ranged... it also could carry heavier loads over longer distances with a 25-percent greater radar-range.
My question was... how much faster was it than the F-106A?
Also, it was said to have much better performance than the RF-101A/C -- How much better (if you can answer that too)
Delta2477A
|
|
|
Post by John Bartoszewicz on Aug 6, 2005 7:16:51 GMT 9
Delta, lets answer the second question first. The RF-101C was a derivative of the F-101A. This was a bomber escort, a jet version of the P-51. In no way could it be compared to the Six or F-4B.
Now the F-4B against the Six. The AF was going to buy 300 more Sixes, however the Navy was having good results with the F-4B. Politics being what they are, the same with budjets, by then the diminishing bomber threat made the F-4 airframe look more versitile and it was, just look at how many were built. All of the AF models had a multifunction capability. I like many MA-1 people did my duty in SEA. While I was trained on the AC-130 Specter, I wound up working Pave Knife. Now I know you never heard of it, because only 5 pods were built. It was the first low light TV pod where the laser fired through the same camera lens.
The F-4 was versitile.
An F-4 pilot told me that at low altitude, if he could sucker a Six into a couple of high "G" turns, the Six would bleed enough energy that he could get a sure kill. However as the altitude got higher, this got harder and at high altitude was almost impossible.
With better missles the fight would have been more even and usually a smart Six pilot could pick his point to "Dash".
"All in all, in an old fashion knife fight, VICTORY SIX".
Hope this all makes sense. Peace, Jack
|
|
delta2477a
F-106 Skilled
Currently: Offline
Posts: 101
Location:
Joined: August 2005
|
Post by delta2477a on Aug 6, 2005 9:36:23 GMT 9
So the F-106A was more maneuverable at high-speed, but the F-4 was faster?
Do you know how MUCH faster the F-4 was?
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Aug 6, 2005 11:24:01 GMT 9
Do you know how MUCH faster the F-4 was? DON'T MAKE MUCH DIFFERENCE, THE SIX STILL HOLDS THE SINGLE ENGINE JET AIR SPEED RECORD......I KNOW SOME PILOTS THAT FLEW BOTH......THERE WAS DEFINITE ENTHUSIASIM WHEN THEY SPOKE OF THE SIX......ABOUT THE SAME AS WHEN THOSE SAME PILOTS SPOTTED A 38- 28 - 34 UNATTACHED BLONDE IN THE O CLUB.........THE F-101 SERIES STARTED OUT AS JACK SAID, THE 101B WAS STRICTLY A FIGHTER INTERCEPTOR, THE RF 101C DEVOID OF ALL ARMAMENT AND PREFORMED BOTH HI AND LOW LEVEL PHOTO RECCON----MOST OF THE TIME WITHOUT WILD WEASLE ESCORT (BEFORE THE ADVENT OF NOSE TAIL WARNING FOR THE 101) MANY OF THOSE 101S WOULD RETURN WITH GREEN STAINS ON THE BOTTOM OF THE ENGINE BAYS FROM TAKING AND LEADING A SAM BACK TO THE GROUND.......... AS TO SUCKERING A SIX PILOT-------LAST I HEARD----ALL THOSE TESTS AND DEMONSTRATIONS WERE WEIGHTED IN FAVOR OF WHAT EVER PLANE WAS TESTING THE SIX.......THE F-4C AND ALL OF ITS VARIANTS WAS NOT AN ALL AROUND FIGHTER- THERE WERE JUST SOMETHINGS IT COULD REAL GOOD AND OTHERS IT WAS MEDIOCRE AT BEST.............I ONCE SAW BOB HOOVER IN A P-51 MAKE AN F-86F PILOT WITH ALMOST 500 HRS IN THE 86 LOOK LIKE HE HAD JUST GOT HIS WINGS OU OF FLIGHT SCHOOL, AND LATER THAT DAY HE TOOK THAT SAME F-86 AND DID THE SAME THING TO AN F-100C PILOT....... SO MUCH FOR COMPARISIONS..........THE F-106 WAS THE ULTIMATE AND THE LAST OF THE INTERCEPTORS......ALOT OF THE SIX'S CAPABILITIES WERE REALLY ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE PILOTS WHO FLEW THEM--- AND I AM NOT AN AF PILOT....The Old Sarge
|
|
delta2477a
F-106 Skilled
Currently: Offline
Posts: 101
Location:
Joined: August 2005
|
Post by delta2477a on Aug 7, 2005 9:25:03 GMT 9
So the airspeed difference was like 0.2 Mach difference or something?
-Delta2477A
|
|
|
Post by John Bartoszewicz on Aug 9, 2005 4:45:28 GMT 9
So the F-106A was more maneuverable at high-speed, but the F-4 was faster? Do you know how MUCH faster the F-4 was? Delta, I did not answer quickly because I'm not sure. It depends on how you read the record and it's interpretation. Sarge is correct, and actually in most cases the only time the Six was above Mach 2 was on a Functional Check Flight or maybe at the end of the month if all training requirements were met and fuel was left over so the pilots could just punch holes in the sky. Then there were pilots that never got to Mach 2, it wasn't necessary. That being said, research indicates that the Six was the only Fighter to break the record in combat ready trim. All others were in record setting trim. The Six set the record for a single engine turbojet at 1525.94mph at 40,000ft on a 40 kilometer closed course. It was the last A/C to fly on the short course. Repeat SHORT COURSE!!! In modern books this speed is sometimes refered to as Absolute Speed. I believe absolute speed is different, but I am at a loss to explain exactly what it is. I'll give you my thought at the end. In the short course, you are at altitude, lined up on your gate and have time to accelerate. You should hit the gate "balls out" and hit the exit gate with you hair on fire, do a 180 degree turn and do it again back the way you came. Do you make a high "G" turn and lose energy, or a lower "G" turn to sustain energy and skip over three states. The F-4H on the long course 100 Kilometers set the 2 turbojet record at 1390.24mph at 40,000 ft. The running of the gates is identical to the 40, so does this really mean anything? The Absolute Speed record for the F-4H was 1660.5mph. In my mind, absolute speed is the fastest possible speed without killing yourself. Generally speaking, the Six is limited to Mach 2.3 . You see Delta, the faster that big delta wing goes, the lower your angle of attack gets until you nose finally wraps around and kisses your tail. In plain words you tumble through the sky and disitigrate. That is why the X model and most European delta wings have a canard wing. No fighter fights to good arount Mach 2. Hope this clarifies something? Jack :-)
|
|
delta2477a
F-106 Skilled
Currently: Offline
Posts: 101
Location:
Joined: August 2005
|
Post by delta2477a on Aug 11, 2005 8:06:16 GMT 9
So, you're saying that the F-106 was configured in it's regular combat configuration...
And the F-4H was completely clean (not even those streamlined tanks?), or did it have the tanks too...?
-Delta2477
|
|
|
Post by Cougar on Aug 11, 2005 13:50:29 GMT 9
Jack can correct me if I'm wrong, but clean on a speed run means no tanks or external hardware of any sort; and, it means that major seam lines were smoothed over and the acft was completely waxed, including down the intake ducts. It also means that the 79s were burning clean; trimmed to run hot. The six used for the speed run was the backup b1rd, sans tanks, and packing several flights of test dirt and grime; not washed, nor waxed. She was just a normal run of the mill F-106. It's fair to speculate that had there been a "B" model available, the speed record would have been faster than it was.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Aug 11, 2005 22:51:03 GMT 9
COUGAR IS RIGHT------52 YRS AGO- I spent 3 days with a rivet shaver shaving the heads on 4 F-86s that we took to the Bendix Air Races.......Many cans of NeverDull were also used.......How about the noise of that air operated shaver in the intake? We even shot powdered walnut hulls into the intake to clean the compressor blades.......Prior to the runs, all the hard point mount bolt holes were faired over,,,,,,,,,,,, AND the a/c were waxed and hand polished... The comparision still has no merit --1 engine vs 2.........The Old Sarge bout like a CROSLEY vs MG race
|
|
|
Post by John Bartoszewicz on Aug 11, 2005 23:19:03 GMT 9
Correct Cougar, But let's remember that this was pre AAR, so the supersonic drops were not available.
As a matter of fact, when the old subsonic tank was removed the underside of the wing was clean, there was no pemanent pylon.
Speed and altitude record A/C are jokes. The F-15A that went for the climb to altitude record at Grand Forks AFB, ND is an example. I'll give them the ideal conditions (-20 degrees), I'll even except a good start (A/C bolted down, full mil and burners), Blow the bolts and he was airbourn in 700 feet, but the A/C was naked. It had no paint or decals, so beside the "HOT TUNE" it did not resemble a fltight lne A/C at all.
The Six beside being F/L ready was a 56 model probably needing a wax job and a paint job. The wings were changed on the 57's and later and the "B" was slightly faster.
When compared to the F-4H (F-4B) 100 kilometer run the Six was faster.
Just what is the ABSOLUTE SPEED RECORD?
Also let's remember ADC had the "flyoff" to get some new A/C. ADC got neither. Jack, :-)
|
|
delta2477a
F-106 Skilled
Currently: Offline
Posts: 101
Location:
Joined: August 2005
|
Post by delta2477a on Aug 12, 2005 2:04:46 GMT 9
So, the F-106 (the 56 model) was not as fast as the -57 because of the different wing-design?
And isn't the B-model a trainer? How is it faster?
The F-106 was faster on the 100 km run? -So it takes longer to accelerate, but overall is faster?
-Delta2477 (BTW: What does Pre-AAR mean?)
|
|
|
Post by John Bartoszewicz on Aug 13, 2005 0:22:32 GMT 9
Delta, AAR is Air to Air Refueling. Prior to 1967, you could not go supersonic with the drops installed. On landing, the fuel truck would fuel the A/C but the tanks had to have the gas cap removed on each and be refueled by hand. Then they had to be retorqued to the wing. When the tank was removed, the underside of the wing was smooth, you could not attach anything.
After AAR there was no flight restriction on the tanks, unless you planned to pull 11 or 12 Gs :-) (Griffis Trial). The whole A/C was single point refueled, either airborne or on the ground. The best part was you torqued the tanks when hung and cheched them after the first flight.
The 56 models while at Test Squadron were inentical to the 57 models, except for the wings. The first Six had the exact same wing as the F-102 with the fence. I don't know how many were done this way, but either at Edwards or at Convair the fence was removed and the wing slot (vortex generator) was put in. Aside from that it is still the F-102 wing. The 57s, 58s and 59s all have the F-106 wing where the wingtip is rolled down about a 1/2 inch. If measured from the wing root to the tip against a penedicular point, the 56 wing was 1/2 inch longer on each side. But measured from the wing root to where the the tip hit the perpedicular, the later models were 1/2 inch shorter until you measured through the roll and there it was, the same. A lot of people got suckered by this.
The belief is that the later wing gave more lift.
After the test program, when all the 59s were finished, the test A/C, 56 models were sent back to Convair and brought up to 59 specs in all ways except, for the wings.
The "B" model is another story. The B is and isn't a trainer. It is fully fuctional as an "A" only having a slightly smaller fusalage tank and repositioned MA-1 electronics so the center of gravity is slightly futher aft.
You do see where this is going Delta, don't you?
If the "B" is a fighter with one pilot and we know is faster (Because the Pilots told us it was!), with more lift and a better center of gravity, in Speed Run Condition, (New Paint Job, Polishing, Hot Trim) what would the record be.
Makes you wonder!!! Glad you liked the FA-22 pics, Jack :-)
|
|
|
Post by John Bartoszewicz on Aug 13, 2005 0:47:54 GMT 9
Followup to last post.
Delta the Six never ran the 100 km course, but always outperfomed the F-4 at medium to hight altitudes. As Lt Col Shulmister has said "The outcome was usually Predetermined".
As the F-4 pilot told me, He's an MD, who is the husband of my wifes cousin, told me. "In an all out knife fight, VICTORY SIX". This goes along with Lt Col Shulmister. No rules. No rules of engagement.
Finally if I recall properly, in a 2 bird flight 1 "A" and 1 "B" on the takeoff roll, side by side, the "B" accelerated faster, lifted faster and came out of burner faster. Jack
|
|
delta2477a
F-106 Skilled
Currently: Offline
Posts: 101
Location:
Joined: August 2005
|
Post by delta2477a on Aug 13, 2005 11:24:36 GMT 9
Well Mr. B,
I'd have to say the -106B probably would have got the record.
What is that two seat F-106 Trainer called? TF-106?
-Delta
|
|
|
Post by John Bartoszewicz on Aug 14, 2005 4:10:38 GMT 9
Delta, No it's just an F-106B!
This is how it works. All cockpit controls in the front seat same as the "A" "B" backseat can't start engine or transfer ground power to A/C power, reset A/C generators, lower and lock canopy.
Once A/C is started, ready to taxi (canopy down and locked), control can be turned over to the back seat. Backseater has full control except for weapons selection (FRONT SEAT ONLY) and arming. If the Intecept is right the IP will select weapons , arm the weapons and the backseater will pull the trigger. As long as MA-1 control is in the back seat the front seat must also pull the trigger to launch.
The "B" was even launched and landed from the back seat, but not routinely.
When MA-1 control was in the front seat, just make sure nothing was flopping around in the back, like the seat belt or make sure your cargo was well secured.
With control in the front, it was just an "A" with a big canopy.
Speaking of canopies, look at the top line of the "A". straight as a board. Could this cause drag at supersonic speed? Now look at the "B" with the humped canopy and trailing line in back of it. Looks a little like the coke bottle shape of the sides behind the intakes. The coke bottle shape reduced drag in the transonic/supersonic range.
Do you think the "B" canopy helped?
Points to ponder my friend. Jack :-)
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Aug 14, 2005 15:25:54 GMT 9
Points to ponder my friend. Jack :-) BART- BE YE AN MA-1 WEENIE? The Old Sarge
|
|
delta2477a
F-106 Skilled
Currently: Offline
Posts: 101
Location:
Joined: August 2005
|
Post by delta2477a on Aug 16, 2005 16:35:03 GMT 9
Now that I think about it, the F-106B could be argued to be better area ruled than the F-106A.
|
|
|
Post by John Bartoszewicz on Aug 16, 2005 22:18:55 GMT 9
Sarge, Weenie me be Delta, Noe ye be thinkin right Jack
|
|
|
Post by Cougar on Aug 22, 2005 2:43:25 GMT 9
On November 22, 1961, during Operation Skyburner, a Marine Corp pilot set a world absolute speed record of 1606.347 mph in a YF4H-1 over Edwards AFB -- with some assistance -- : The acft was fitted with water/alcohol injection, and the acft was not a fully operational F4H. Do we have anyone with mathematical genius on the ramp; someone who could calculate the hypothetical speed of a "SIX" equipped with 30,000 pounds of thrust"? I'd venture a guess that the "Six" would be about a 100 knots faster, even without the special water/alcohol injection that was used on the F4H-1 speed run.
|
|
Deleted
Currently: Offline
Posts: 0
Location:
Joined: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2008 6:18:45 GMT 9
I think I remember a comparison test of the F4 and the SIX. It was the 48th aircraft on TDY to a near by Naval base. Forgot the Operation name. I remember talking to some of our disappointed airmen, when it was announced the F4 was "better"? But we show them a take-off to remember. All this occured about 1962 or 1963. Al; Blake
|
|