Which was better F-86 or MiG 15?

[XBe02Drvr]

I suspect one reason may have been fuel and C/G management, as the fuel tanks were distributed along the fuselage and the aircraft may have had a fairly limited c/g range.

I remember reading, somewhere back in the fading mists of time, that one of the benefits of the "double delta" configuration was its ability to handle a broad range of CG locations. However, the shape dictated an extensive lengthwise distribution of tankage to fit a reasonable fuel load into that slender profile, requiring an elaborate automatic sequencing of tank selection and constant pilot attention to monitor the system. IIRC, the engine was essentially a license built, but modified and upgraded, J79. (or was that the Viggen? I forget.) In any case it was a downright thirsty SOB.

 

[XBe02Drvr]

I could believe that, I could easily believe it would be able to compare similar to the F-106 in terms of top-end speed, which is pretty fast (from what I remember hearing, the F-106 was around 0.1-0.2 mach faster the Phantom, and about mach 0.1-0.15 slower than the F-104).

Except for bragging rights, who cares what top speed is? It's a number that looks good on paper, but has little, if any relevance to actual combat operations. How quickly it accelerates is far more important. The real limits on top end for most mach 2 category jets are heat related, and the resilience of their windshields and canopies, as well as fuel consumption. Most can touch top speed only momentarily, then have to back off to keep the canopy from melting into the pilot's lap. Besides it's best to go supersonic while flying TOWARDS Homeplate, as it's kinda embarrassing to shut down the burners and discover you haven't enough gas to get home.

 

[swampyankee]

I remember reading, somewhere back in the fading mists of time, that one of the benefits of the "double delta" configuration was its ability to handle a broad range of CG locations. However, the shape dictated an extensive lengthwise distribution of tankage to fit a reasonable fuel load into that slender profile, requiring an elaborate automatic sequencing of tank selection and constant pilot attention to monitor the system. IIRC, the engine was essentially a license built, but modified and upgraded, J79. (or was that the Viggen? I forget.) In any case it was a downright thirsty SOB.

Avon in the Draken; license built and modified JT8D in the Viggen.

 

[XBe02Drvr]

Avon in the Draken; license built and modified JT8D in the Viggen.

Thanks, swampyankee. Don't get old, your memory goes all to hell!

 

[SaparotRob]

I tried to look up just what exactly "Bis" means. RAF uses MK I, MK II, etc. USAF uses A, B, C etc. What does "Bis" actually mean or its origin in aircraft terminology. I did learn it is used in musical terminology to mean repeat.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I tried to look up just what exactly "Bis" means. RAF uses MK I, MK II, etc. USAF uses A, B, C etc. What does "Bis" actually mean or its origin in aircraft terminology. I did learn it is used in musical terminology to mean repeat.

It means it's an improved version

 

[GrauGeist]

The term "bis" comes from France and has a few meanings. In music, it means "encore", in street addresses, it means "second residence at the same location" and in aircraft design, it combines those two, so in essence it's a second or improved version of the original.
Example:
Spad S.20 bis
Nieuport 17 bis
You'll see other aircraft that was built by students of French Aeronautical standards using the term, too.

The Russians use the term because French was used by the Imperial court at the time that Russian aviation was developing and the term remained a standard in their terminology after the Soviets took over.

 

[SaparotRob]

The term "bis" comes from France and has a few meanings. In music, it means "encore", in street addresses, it means "second residence at the same location" and in aircraft design, it combines those two, so in essence it's a second or improved version of the original.
Example:
Spad S.20 bis
Nieuport 17 bis
You'll see other aircraft that was built by students of French Aeronautical standards using the term, too.

The Russians use the term because French was used by the Imperial court at the time that Russian aviation was developing and the term remained a standard in their terminology after the Soviets took over.

Now that's the answer I was looking for!

 

[Zipper730]

Except for bragging rights, who cares what top speed is? It's a number that looks good on paper, but has little, if any relevance to actual combat operations. How quickly it accelerates is far more important. The real limits on top end for most supersonic jets are heat related, and the resilience of their windshields and canopies, as well as fuel consumption.

I was thinking about it from a combination of power and aerodynamics, but you're basically right.

That said, far as I know the F-104, J35, F-106, and F-4 all have sufficient acceleration to get up to Mach 2 quickly enough to be usable as interceptors. I figure at that point you'd want to know if you can accelerate faster, how far you can fly while going supersonic outbound, make a pass or two at enemy bombers, and cruise back subsonic with hopefully enough fuel to land.

 

[XBe02Drvr]

That said, far as I know the F-104, J35, F-106, and F-4 all have sufficient acceleration to get up to Mach 2 quickly enough to be usable as interceptors.

All of these birds better have a nearby target or a tanker available if they're going to buster from takeoff to weapons release. I don't know about the others, but the F4 is NOT a mach 2 interceptor if it's carrying much external fuel and ordnance.
Our hotpad birds had a typical loadout of sometimes two Sparrows, or sometimes two Zuni pods, always two or four Sidewinders, and one large centerline or two smaller wing mounted droptanks, all with associated pylons, and could only bust mach in the lower altitudes in a dive or by "unloading" to near zero G. Shortly after a "hot" scramble a KA6D would often launch and head out southbound. In such cases, I would often get a "buster scramble" of my fuel truck to Hotpad, as the two standby birds were now hot, and the scramble birds would be coming back thirsty. Two min fuel Phantoms and a KA6 tanker could suck a fuel truck dry muy pronto, and it was always "Hurry! Hurry!".
At least that was the weekend routine. During the week I was at my "day" job on the radar trainer, where an F4J NATOPS flight manual was kept for reference. Drag index charts vs. fuel burn at various speeds and altitudes made for very interesting reading. MiG games over the Florida Straits tended to happen at low altitudes, where fuel burn was atrocious.

 

[BlackSheep]

With that gaping air intake, is that surprising? Looks like a "popper" type bass lure. About as un-area-rule as you can get. The original SLUF.

Lol, a popper lure? All it needs are the whimsical eyes and some trebles..

 

[XBe02Drvr]

Lol, a popper lure? All it needs are the whimsical eyes and some trebles..

Nose art verboten on communist aircraft, but it wore its "trebles" under its chin!

 

[WARSPITER]

The term "bis" comes from France and has a few meanings. In music, it means "encore", in street addresses, it means "second residence at the same location" and in aircraft design, it combines those two, so in essence it's a second or improved version of the original.
Example:
Spad S.20 bis
Nieuport 17 bis
You'll see other aircraft that was built by students of French Aeronautical standards using the term, too.

The Russians use the term because French was used by the Imperial court at the time that Russian aviation was developing and the term remained a standard in their terminology after the Soviets took over.

Yes and used in tanks as well - Char B1 followed by Char B1 Bis followed by Char B1 Ter (basically third).

 

[GrauGeist]

Yes and used in tanks as well - Char B1 followed by Char B1 Bis followed by Char B1 Ter (basically third).

Of course, the Char being French.
Their BIS convention was occasionally amended, like the Spad S.20 (again), for example:
Spad S.20
Spad S.20 bis
Spad S.20 bis-1
Spad S.20 bis-2
Spad S.20 bis-3
Spad S.20 bis-4
Spad S.20 bis-5
Spad S.20 bis-6

 

[WARSPITER]

Of course, the Char being French.
Their BIS convention was occasionally amended, like the Spad S.20 (again), for example:
Spad S.20
Spad S.20 bis
Spad S.20 bis-1
Spad S.20 bis-2
Spad S.20 bis-3
Spad S.20 bis-4
Spad S.20 bis-5
Spad S.20 bis-6

I assume by this that Spad got very bissy ..... yeah I know, coat, hat, ........

 

[Zipper730]

I was thinking of something: Didn't the J35 have some kind of custom built afterburner? It seemed rather long and large compared to typical afterburners

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I was thinking of something: Didn't the J35 have some kind of custom built afterburner? It seemed rather long and large compared to typical afterburners

No, but there was a handful of operational F-86s flown in Korea that had JATO rockets permanently installed and used as a make shift afterburner. I'll look up the info later this evening.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

4th FW had 6 F-86Fs with a belly pod that housed 3 JATO bottles. This was a field answer to deal with the MiG-15's altitude advantage. The JATO set up gave either a 14 or 38 second burst depending how they were fired. One of these Sabers were flown by Capt. Cliff Jolley, 335th FS. 7 Kills, 2 using the JATO pod. This mod was short lived as it made the aircraft tail heavy, added 2 1/2 hours in turn over time and also caused the aircraft to porpoise in certain situations.

 

[Zipper730]

No, but there was a handful of operational F-86s flown in Korea that had JATO rockets permanently installed and used as a make shift afterburner. I'll look up the info later this evening.

No... I mean the J35 Draken, the Swedish interceptor/fighter design.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

No... I mean the J35 Draken, the Swedish interceptor/fighter design.

Thought you were talking about the engine