The best fighter of the 1950's.

[pbfoot]

. One problem I heard about that was trying to be fixed when I worked next door to Vought at Temco was that when the guns were fired the engine flamed out. .

The same problem was also present in those F 86's with the 20mm cannon in Korea

 

[Glider]

Can I ask for the details of that book as its one that I would like to read properly.
Thanks
David

 

[Waynos]

Certainly David, happy to oblige

It is 'Testing Early Jets by Roland Beamont, published by Airlife in 1990 and the ISBN is 1 85310 158 3

Got mine off ebay for £2.50, might be worth a punt.

 

[Soren]

I have now uncovered the Beaumont book I referred to previously. Here is the report I was referring to earlier in support of the Lightning.

Also in the same chapter Beaumont writes "the Lightning was likely to remain superior (to the F-106) on many counts. These included acceleration and time to altitude, and hard turning capability and sustained g at all altitudes due to the Lightnings low tailplane configuration which produced significantly less lift-loss and induced drag in the turn than the all-elevon wing of the F-106"

"Of the first three generations of subsonic, transonic and mach 2 capable jet fighters the North American F-86 Sabre was undoubtedly the classic of the first era. The English Electric Lightning will always be held, by its pilots at least, to be the finest of the first mach 2 fighters, the F-106 and Mirage running it in all departments except combat manoeuvrability in which the Lightning was supreme " (my emphasis)

I don't know why the middle page came out smaller when all I did was press 'scan' three times?

Great post Waynos!

This pretty much confirms my guesses.

Gotta love the Lightning, a spectacular a/c for its time, the best fighter in the world during that period IMO.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Great post Waynos!

This pretty much confirms my guesses.

Gotta love the Lightning, a spectacular a/c for its time, the best fighter in the world during that period IMO.

I'm still skeptical as no one (including me) could provide performance data at altitude on both aircraft. The comparisons are being made with contemporary aircraft of the time and the F-101 wasn't exactly the top of the century series fighters in many respects. The Lightning was a spectacular aircraft and in a real time combat situation it would have done its damage way before any opportunity to dog fight would have presented itself, as similar to the 106. I still question its turning and performance ability at altitude.

It had short legs and although a tanker was a solution, it isn't always that easy to get a tanker on station in an intercept situation however for the role it was designed for, I think during its operational career the Lightning was the perfect aircraft.

Don't forget that later in its career the Lightning was structurally limited in G loading, especially during take off.

 

[Soren]

I don't understand how you can doubt its turning performance at altitude FLYBOYJ, what is the reason behind your doubts ?

According to Beaumont the Lightning was clearly a much better turn fighter than the F-106 Mirage, and it climbed accelerated much faster as-well.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I don't understand how you can doubt its turning performance at altitude FLYBOYJ, what is the reason behind your doubts ?

According to Beaumont the Lightning was clearly a much better turn fighter than the F-106 Mirage, and it climbed accelerated much faster as-well.

Is there any proof that Beaumont even flew the 106? Here did fly the F-104 but I see no reference of him flying the 106. He was a great pilot but I would prefer to believe what the -1s (POH) for each aircraft tells me and if possible compare actual flight data from both aircraft.

 

[Soren]

But it's not just Beaumont FLYBOYJ, it's also Capt. Dan Schuyller who it seems did fly the F-106.

I dunno wether Beaumont flew the F-106, but since he makes a comparison between the two I would assume he did.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

But it's not just Beaumont FLYBOYJ, it's also Capt. Dan Schuyller who it seems did fly the F-106.

I dunno wether Beaumont flew the F-106, but since he makes a comparison between the two I would assume he did.

Read the article, Schuyller makes only one reference to the 106. The only other comparisons were between the F-86 and F-101.

 

[Soren]

Yes but Schuyller later states than the Lightning was the most combat maneuverable Mach 2 fighter in the world at the time.

 

[Waynos]

Yes, Beamont did fly the 106 as well as the F-102A, F-101 AND F-104. The flight test reports are contained in chapter 5 "Testing 2nd Generation American Jet Fighters, 1958" which is the same chapter that Dan Schuyllers report is taken from and is a direct comparison between these aircraft and the Lightning.

Part of this report states that "Performance, which during the climb phase promises well, is disappointing at altitude and, as measured, does not approach the standard at present achieved with the P.1B series"

a little further down the page he reflects " on the way back to the UK it was pleasant to reflect that in the Lightning it was now clear that the RAF had a fighter which could handle anything in the USAF's inventory up to and including the F-106"

I am conscious that this is now starting to resemble a hatchet job on the F-106 from me so I want to point out that Beamont was very fulsome in his praise of the F-106 thoughout the five pages in the book that this report covers, he just felt that the Lightning, in terms of performance, was better.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Yes but Schuyller later states than the Lightning was the most combat maneuverable Mach 2 fighter in the world at the time.

One opinion from an exchange pilot. No indication on how many hours he had in the -106 or if he was even really qualified to give a full assessment of either aircraft. Had the article stated Schuyller's hours, training, time in both aircraft and if he any experience as a test pilot, his statement would catch my interest more. Again, show me the -1 for both aircraft and we might be able to determine how both aircraft would have performed at altitude.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Yes, Beamont did fly the 106 as well as the F-102A, F-101 AND F-104. The flight test reports are contained in chapter 5 "Testing 2nd Generation American Jet Fighters, 1958" which is the same chapter that Dan Schuyllers report is taken from and is a direct comparison between these aircraft and the Lightning.

Part of this report states that "Performance, which during the climb phase promises well, is disappointing at altitude and, as measured, does not approach the standard at present achieved with the P.1B series"

a little further down the page he reflects " on the way back to the UK it was pleasant to reflect that in the Lightning it was now clear that the RAF had a fighter which could handle anything in the USAF's inventory up to and including the F-106"

I am conscious that this is now starting to resemble a hatchet job on the F-106 from me so I want to point out that Beamont was very fulsome in his praise of the F-106 thoughout the five pages in the book that this report covers, he just felt that the Lightning, in terms of performance, was better.

That's what I'm looking for.

 

[Waynos]

What the whole report? It basically gives all the figures for the F-106 recorded on that particular test flight interspersed with Bea's judgement ie the weapons system was better than on the Lightning, the handling was excellent, the Lightning was easier to fly and was faster, more manoeuvrable etc. Is that what you want scanning? Or do you mean something else?

 

[Soren]

So do we have a settlement ?

 

[FLYBOYJ]

What the whole report? It basically gives all the figures for the F-106 recorded on that particular test flight interspersed with Bea's judgement ie the weapons system was better than on the Lightning, the handling was excellent, the Lightning was easier to fly and was faster, more manoeuvrable etc. Is that what you want scanning? Or do you mean something else?

No that's it, but don't scan it, I'll take your word for it!

 

[FLYBOYJ]

So do we have a settlement ?

Just about....

 

[Waynos]

Read the article, Schuyller makes only one reference to the 106. The only other comparisons were between the F-86 and F-101.

Notivce he mentions the turning ability of the F-86 and the power of the F-101, a much larger fighter. He does not mention the performance of either, but id clearly highly impressed with the manouverability. Exactly what words were used and not used can be analysed to death but the meaning is clear.

Oh, and was that sarcasm I detected?

I was just a bit shocked at the prospect of scanning and uploading 5 pages of a book at 3 am, but don't mind me

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Notivce he mentions the turning ability of the F-86 and the power of the F-101, a much larger fighter. He does not mention the performance of either, but id clearly highly impressed with the manouverability. Exactly what words were used and not used can be analysed to death but the meaning is clear.

Oh, and was that sarcasm I detected?

No sarcasm, but agree

I was just a bit shocked at the prospect of scanning and uploading 5 pages of a book at 3 am, but don't mind me

That's what I call "thread dedication!"

What years did Beau fly the 106?

 

[Waynos]

Done it! I just hope they aren't upside down!

I don't know about later on but the tests in this book were done on a tour in 1958.
This also raises another question. Did the F-106 have any future develop0ments aimed at improving manoeuvrability? The Lightning on which Schuyller flew was a F.6 which, like the F.2A, had a revised wing planform with cranked and drooped leading edgewhich enhanced the turn rate. This was not in use at the time of these tests