The best fighter of the 1950's.

Lucky13 · Apr 30, 2009

I knoooow....Draken, with THREE months!

timshatz · Apr 30, 2009

drgondog said:
The 106 was very agile, but slower in acceleration relative to the Lightning and the MiG 21. Probably the best manuever aircraft in the US inventory in the 50's. However it was pure missle in the 50's.

The F-105 actually had better than 1:1 - at least in the 355th which got 20 in the air in NVN... but the favorite saying for the Thud drivers was "Check your 12" simply because speed was its out manuever. Nothing could touch it on the deck - not even the F-4.

The 355th had three guys score 2 in one mission, plus Thorsness got one and a probable when he got his Medal.

Having said this it was TAC spec all the way. Fast, on the deck, deliver a big Nuc and get outta town and really doesn't get votes as an air combat fighter.

Dragon, is there a site (or book) that covers the F105 in Vietnam? Especially the Air To Air stuff. I didn't know there were guys who got 2 in one flying the Thud. Thought they were rare one here, one there.

drgondog · Apr 30, 2009

Lucky13 said:
Have to ask Soren, old sport. With this poll, is it meant those that first flew in the 50's or introduced into airforce service? Why I ask is that the Mirage first flew in '56 but entered service in '61.... Then I wouldn't mind to howl for the Swedish J 35 Draken which entered service....oh cr*p!....March '60! B*ll*cks!
But, again, it first flew in '55. How does the F-102 Delta Dagger fit into this compared to the F-106 Delta Dart already mentioned? Aaand the Starfighter, is that a fighter or an interceptor here?

The 102 was a dog, the 106 was a major mod to incorporate Whitcomb Rule fule fuselage plus extend the fuselage somewhat forward of the exhaust inlet and upgrade the engines.

The 106 was a super manuever fighter that was only finally defeated by the F-15 (from the USAF inventory) and very fast in level flight. It had the same WL as a P38, 50% better T/W than the F-104 and was a Mach 2.3 ship with 1300mi operational range, 1600 mi normal ferry range..

Initial climb about 42,800 f/m - one 20mm M61, 4x Falcons, 1x Genie. This and the F-14 were our best interceptor until the F-15 arrived.

I just looked up the Lightning on wiki.

It cites 2.27M vs (2.31 for 106) and 50k/min intial climb but strangely the WL is 87+ (vs 52+ for 106) and T/W is .63 (versus .65 for 106) and ceiling of 60k (vs 53K for 106) - which leads to a little head scratching

It sounds like the Lightning was a little cleaner and the engines performed better at high altitude - otherwise the 106 should climb faster.

drgondog · Apr 30, 2009

Lucky13 said:
I knoooow....Draken, with THREE months!

And F-4, even though first flight was '58

Waynos · Apr 30, 2009

I voted MiG 21, before I read the thread, Duh. MiG 21 is obviously the most successful but the reports from British and US test pilots featured in R P Beaumonts book Testing Early Jets seems to put the Lightning at the head of the list as the best in terms of a pilots aircraft, one USAF test pilot dscribes as 'as hot as the F-104 but handles like the F-86 followed by excited excalamations of its sheer brilliance that I can't remember the exact wording of. The Lightning was also described as the only pure fighter in the Western arsenal and the fastest climber until the arrival of the F-15 in service, both pretty impressive claims so that would seem to give it the edge from the mouths of people who flew it.

An article penned in the early 80's and published in an RAF yearbook also has a Lightning pilot claiming that while he wouldn't try to turn with an F-16, it didn't scare him and he could defeat it with his Lightning quite happily. Sheer bravado? Quite probably, but the old girl sure was loved!

Also, it wasn't the F-106 that introduced area rule, it was the F-102A as the previous YF-102 model could not exceed mach unity in level flight.

kool kitty89 · Apr 30, 2009

F-102 was much slower though. Thrust/weight doesn't seem much different, though it's also a lot lighter. (106 has much more powerful engines) Wingloading's lower for the 102 though.

I din't know the F-106 was that good a dogfighter, kind of figured with the Delta wing (low AR + elevons, tailed deltas like the MiG 21 avoiding the latter issue) it wouldn't be that great. I know delta's have the weird, super high AoA characteristics thing, but I would have though the high parasite drag in such conditions woud limit utility in a dogfight. (too much loss in speed)

davparlr · Apr 30, 2009

Soren said:
Damn how could I forget about the F8 Crusader ! One of my fav a/c !

I'm voting for the F-8 just because it has always been my favorite jet.

Drgondog said:
The F-105 actually had better than 1:1 - at least in the 355th which got 20 in the air in NVN... but the favorite saying for the Thud drivers was "Check your 12" simply because speed was its out manuever. Nothing could touch it on the deck - not even the F-4.

It was greased lightning on the deck!

The 102 was a dog, the 106 was a major mod to incorporate Whitcomb Rule fule fuselage plus extend the fuselage somewhat forward of the exhaust inlet and upgrade the engines.

As Waynos stated, the F-102A was a "coke bottle" airplane, I believe, the first. But it certainly was a dog, relatively speaking.

drgondog · Apr 30, 2009

timshatz said:
Dragon, is there a site (or book) that covers the F105 in Vietnam? Especially the Air To Air stuff. I didn't know there were guys who got 2 in one flying the Thud. Thought they were rare one here, one there.

Brestal got 2 on 10 Mar 67, the 355th TFW got 5 on 19 Apr 67, the only a/c that topped that was three wings of F4's on Jan 2, 1967. The F-105s shot down the second higest total (32) of any aircraft in the US. The 355th had a 2:1 air to air ratio better than most US fighter wings. (I was wrong about two doubles)

The 355th (21) shot down more Migs w/105s than all the F-8 USN/USMC Air Groups in the combined (14). Only the F4 shot down more (70) spread across 5 AF wings and the USN.

The 8th TFW (Olds-F4) killed 20, the 355th shot down 21 making it the single top MiG killer wing of USAF and USN.

Go Thuds!!! Little known fact of Viet Nam. One helluva aiplane which dropped more bombs from just the 355th than any BG in 8th AF (202,000 tons) and maybe more than even any Lanc Wing (I don't have the numbers)

But NEVER designed as an air superiority fighter or strategic bomber - but it did ONE HELLUVA JOB!

drgondog · Apr 30, 2009

davparlr said:
As Waynos stated, the F-102A was a "coke bottle" airplane, I believe, the first. But it certainly was a dog, relatively speaking.

Dave I don't believe the 102 was the first area rule fuselage. My data has the 106 design as a direct result of huge disapponitment with F-102A! The F-102 B was a radical redign from the F-102A and led to the F-106

Flyboy2 · Apr 30, 2009

drgondog said:
Dave I don't believe the 102 was the first area rule fuselage.

Actually I think he might be right. From what I've managed to scrape up the 102 was the first aircraft to operationally use the area rule in its truest form. Aircraft such as the Tu-95 Bear were modified to take advantage of this by adding fuselage buldges but they weren't truly designed for the Area rule... It was actually first patented by Junkers in 1944.

As for the best aircraft, I'm going to have to say on combat record with usage and longevity its got to be the MiG-21

But I've always loved the F-8 and the Sabre so I think I'm voting Crusader

parsifal · May 1, 2009

is the A-4 classified as a fighter or a bomber? I ask this because even though it was designed as a bomber, it was used ooperationaly bysome of its operators as a fighter

Lucky13 · May 1, 2009

Area rule??

Lucky13 · May 1, 2009

From the Wiki....

"A USAF comparison study of the accident rate of all the Century Series, F-4 Phantom, A-7, and F-111 aircraft over 750,000 flying hours showed that the F-100 Super Sabre led the table with an accident rate over double that of the F-104 (471 accidents for the F-100 versus 196 for the F-104) which had the second-highest rate, closely followed by the F-102 Delta Dagger. It should be noted that the F-104 figures in this study were taken over 600,000 hours since that type had not reached 750,000 hours at the time."

How many of the '104's accidents was due to the aircraft itself, as in construction, manufacturing etc.?

Graeme · May 1, 2009

Lucky13 said:
Area rule??

Area rule - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Flyboy2 said:
Aircraft such as the Tu-95 Bear were modified to take advantage of this by adding fuselage buldges but they weren't truly designed for the Area rule.

G'day FB2. Did you happen to read that from the Wiki site above?

The Tupolev Tu-95 'Bear', a Soviet-era bomber, was modified by adding large bulged nacelles behind the two inner engines, instead of decreasing the cross section of the fuselage next to the wing root.

Seems an odd statement (Wiki) as from what I understand they're not "Kuchemann Knuckles" as seen on the Convair 990 but a box fairing for the undercarriage. This prevented having to cut into the highly stressed wings and was first(?) seen on the Tu-16, which does look to be area-ruled...

...and the Bear followed suit. It was elongated (Item No.71) on latter versions but there is no proof that this was for aerodynamic reasons...

Lucky13 · May 1, 2009

Thanks Graeme...gave me a headache though!

renrich · May 1, 2009

Good book on VN and F105s called "Thud Ridge" I read it perhaps 20 years ago. Have a friend who flew the Thud in VN, was later a Braniff pilot. Is in his seventies and still flies a twin. I talked with him about flying in general but never asked him about the Thud specifically. For ACM, I picked the F8U.

davparlr · May 1, 2009

drgondog said:
Dave I don't believe the 102 was the first area rule fuselage. My data has the 106 design as a direct result of huge disapponitment with F-102A! The F-102 B was a radical redign from the F-102A and led to the F-106

I think it is pretty obvious in the attached picture. Note the added bulges at the exhaust exit area.

drgondog · May 1, 2009

davparlr said:
I think it is pretty obvious in the attached picture. Note the added bulges at the exhaust exit area.

Dave - you are correct. It was the redesign of the YF-102 to the F-102A that resulted in the Whitcomb Area Rule change to fuselage because of disappointing speed performance of the YF-102.

The F-102B was a further and major redesign of the A and became the basis for the F-106 because the B was so significantly different.

drgondog · May 1, 2009

Lucky13 said:
Area rule??

Google "Whitcomb Area Rule"..

the theory behind it is complicated but the resulting cross sectional areas as you move aft of the cockpit must be reduced at the wing/body intersection to achieve necessary wave drag reductions.

The effect of adding wings to a cylindrical (straight) body added approximately 2x Wave Drag.

Waynos · May 1, 2009

These two images show the evolution of the F-102 to accomodate area rule. Ther first one from 1955 describes the F-102A but illustrates the YF-102 as the images of the update were still secret, the second picture is from the 1956 edition when the images were released. Incidentally, I read that the Lightning 'accidentally' benefitted from area rule by the addition of the belly tank, which may have been the first CFT's in the world, despite what Lockheed says when they try to sell you an F-16

The best fighter of the 1950's.

The best fighter of the 1950's

Supermarine Scimitar

Hawker Hunter

MIG-19

F-105 Thunderchief

English Electric Lighting

F-100 Super Sabre

Dassault Super Mystère

MIG-21

F-86 Sabre

F-8 Crusader

F-106 Delta Dart

F-102 Delta Dagger

F-104 Starfighter

Forum Mascot

Chief Master Sergeant

Major

Major

Staff Sergeant

Senior Master Sergeant

Senior Master Sergeant

Major

Major

Senior Airman

Colonel

Forum Mascot

Forum Mascot

1st Sergeant

Forum Mascot

Chief Master Sergeant

Senior Master Sergeant

Attachments

Major

Major

Staff Sergeant

Users who are viewing this thread

Similar threads