Joe's point, which he expands on throughout the video, is from that intial design perspective. Yes, some of them had long careers but it also took a while to work out the quirks. We are big fans of F-105 here and have interviewed Gen Russ Violett about his two tours on the aircraft.
I don’t think they were unsuccessful. The F-100 was outstanding at the beginning of the American involvement in Vietnam. It was moved to other missions and served well for the duration. The F-105 Thunderchief also was a workhorse in Vietnam. The Century series fighters were developed in the 50’s at a time when intercepting Soviet nuclear bombers was the big priority. The fact that they did as well as they did in a completely different kind of war in the mid-60’s in Vietnam is kind of impressive to me.
G'day, A couple of points. Vietnam's AmeriKan War was Fought because Robert MacNamara publicised the mistaken US Navy Midshipman's fear that 2 Dolphins in the Tonkin Gulf MIGHT Be "Communist Torpedoes"...; But MacNamara and Kissinger then kept the Updated report - which arrived in Washington, from CINCPAC in Hawaii, 35 minutes later telling that the Not-Torpedoes were actual Dolphins..., a Secret which lasted until the release of The Pentagon Papers in 1971 or '72. Therefore, thus, and because, Vietnam fought an Honest Honourable War, defending against an Invading Nation whose ENTIRE "justification" for Launching and waging and making War..., was a Dirty filthy transparently fraudulent Lie. And so, there was NOTHING Done by Anyone who fought for ANZUS In Vietnam, That was in any way, shape, or form, "Honourable". Everyone in ANZUS was out there, Killing Strangers for pay because their own Politicians pretended that their "National Honour" Demanded that SOMEONE had to try not to die, While living in a Ditch..., fighting to control a Crossroads - in the Muddle of nowhere on Earth that anybody in their own Hometown, had ever previously heard of... Such is life, Have a good one... Stay safe. ;-p Ciao !
My favorite Century Series is the F106. It looked great (especially in test range orange) flew great and was operational until displaced by the F15 in the 1980s! Only the F104 stayed in service longer and F106 didn't have the nasty characteristics that killed so many German F104 pilots. Of course it only helped that my dad knew most of the engineers who designed the F104. Another reason it is seared into my brain is getting bused by one flying 9 foot above the road we were driving on. Dad told me it was an F106 that was testing ground hugging radar out of China Lake NAS. Instead of flying over us (that would probably blown us off the road) the F106 banked left then right. When he passed us his wing was 3 feet above the ground in a 90 degree bank and I could see the top of the pilots helmet. The F106 then pulled in front of us and disappeared disappeared after flew over an approximately 10 foot tall hill on the road. It was a thrill of my life and I latter found that most jets of the era would probably have fallen appart trying that maneuver. Yes give me an F106 With no gun just rockets It flies real fast Destroys enemies with an expensive missile, can dog fight but doesn't, Just comes home with no rockets and bingo fuel, and a happy pilot who sees love after every mission. The F106 was retained in the USA as an interceptor. It's missile system was the 1st of its kind and designed to shoot down Soviet bombers without getting lose enough to the bomber to be at risk. It was only exceeded by the YF12A which didn't go into serial production production. It's missile was the basis for that used on F14. While the F4 was superior in almost every way, there were never enough F4s to replace the F106 in homeland interceptor role. The F106 was too expensive to build, but those that were built kept on flying .
The six was the favorite mount of ADC pilots. Not only does it still hold the world record speed of single engine turbines at 1,525 mph, it also had "supercruise" ability 40 years before the F-22. It was said that the six could get there the fastest, with the mostest! In combat loadout, it was faster than the F-4 as it remained aerodynamically clean. Nothing slows plane down faster than hanging ordinance out in the wind! The six deserved a few more minutes than what she got here.😢
What a thrill that close buzz was. Wish it could have happened to me! I like the whole series, but I think I like the 106 best. From what I understand, F-15 can't get inside of in a turn contest. I heard that from a retired ANG pilot.
I loved having Joe on here and how he can explain aerodynamics in laymen’s terms while showing innovations on existing century fighters. I do wish he would have spent more time on The Six. Still the fastest single engine jet ever and had about 30 years of frontline service with the U.S. Air Force. It truly was something special
Century series fighters were always my favorite period of aircraft, especially the Lockheed F-104 Starfighter. But I always favor anything designed by Kelly Johnson. If memory serves, I believe crews working on the F-104 had to put wing edge gaurds on the front and trailing parts of the wings to minimize injuries, those things were so sharp. a shame the F-108 Rapier was never produced. I think it would have been an interesting addition to the Century series. I look forward to you guy's next video.
Those bumps on the rear fuselage of the F102 are called Whitcombe bodies I believe, linked to the area rule and named after the NACA engineer who developed them. The Handley Page Victor bomber in the UK also had these on the trailing edge of the swept wings.
Check out ‘Kuchemann carrots’. You correct they streamline according to area rule. Convair 990 another (extreme) example. A lesson here is Whitcomb visualizing the flow, a bit of a story in itself. His later contribution =winglets= ubiquitous nowadays. Great contributions to flight..
Why so dismissive of the Voodoo? It was just as innovative than the others, was honest on it's top speed (way faster than the Hun or the 102) and it's planform evolved into the F4 - so pretty important right there. Plus the recon bird did solid service in Nam.
I worked on the flightdeck of aircraft carriers during the 1970's. We were warned about standing near the intake of a jet, even off to the side as you could get sucked in. The F-8 and A-7 were especially notorious for this.
I toured Pima two years ago on a brutally hot day. The heat dictated a trolly tour, so I didn't get to see many of the aircraft as I would have liked; still, it was quite interesting.
wasn't there a heated discussion about funding between the F4H and the F-110 (Senate/Congress?) which contributed towards the push for a common designation
For me at least this era is the magic age of aviation. Beyond the Century Serious there's the B-36, B-47 and B-58 Hustler which are all fascinating airframes. There's also something about the way they all look that's really athletically pleasing.
Complertely agree. We've covered the B-58 on the channel, will be discussing the impact of the B-47 on the B-52 in our Boeing's Fortresses series starting on Thursday as well. The B-36 is an asthetic abomination though! 😄
Missing 3, the F-110, F-111, and F-117. Technically speaking, they were not part of it, the F-110 was the AF model of the Navy F-4 but was later renamed back to standardize the numbering system, F-111 was never used as a fighter but as a bomber with the FB-111 having a heavier load capacity, and the F-117 designed years later, also as a fighter/bomber. But they could explain all that at the museum. Airplane nuts (like me) love the background details.
We covered the F-117 from a pilot's perspective earlier with our interview with Jon Boyd. As for the F-4, we haven't done anything specific, yet, but we will. I'm not a fan of the F-111 so I've avoided it so far!
Hi, we felt that following the 1962 Tri-Service designation scheme, the F-4 didn't 'technically, fall within the traditional Century Series timeframe. Plus, as you saw with the video, it would have been a disservice ti the F-4 to only give it a few minutes. There needs to be a proper, multi-part look at the Phantom and it is in a draft script stage at the moment. Hope that explains things a bit. 🙂
As you guys forgot the F-110, the ( Original Design Number for what would become the Phantastic F-4 Phantom ) from your "Century Series," How about it's OWN video with all the good , bad and Double Ugly, what some would call a real turkey, but most recognize as the Worlds best Jet fighter for more then 50 years, America at it's finest, when you say Jet Fighter, the F-4 is what comes to mind! And if we were to REALLY split hairs here, you should really do a video on the often forgotten F8U Crusader, the Last Gun Fighter, also a part of the Century series, but it's own special blend of Navy Cool!
As I imply in the introduction, the F-110 didn't really happen as it morphed into the F-4, which is not generally considered to be Century Series. Now, that doesn't mean there isn't a lot of love on the channel for the Phantom (see our interview with Eileen Bjorkman), it just doesn't fit in this discuss. Plus the F-4 is far too big a subject to give justice too when considering all the aircraft we did chat about.
The missing ones were the F-103, which he mentioned, the F-109, which was the proposed designation for what became the F-101B, the F-108 Rapier (I wish that one had flown!), and the F-110 Specter, which was the Air Force's original designation for the Navy's F4H-1 Phantom II.
Good video. I was a little disappointed that he never mentioned any advanced features of the electronics through the years. The F-86 gunsight. The 105's terrain following computer. The 106's ability to relay information to other planes and the ground to coordinate attacks. And that the 104 had none of that since it was designed from the start to be an absolute hot rod. And it was the longest flying of the series being retired by the Italians in 2004.
We took a lot on trying to cover as many as we need and we decided to stick to the aerodynamic on this video. So many facinating features on each of the aircraft we could have disapeared down any number of rabbit holes. Did you see the Italians have got one of their F-104s flying again?
Excellent video, so interesting! I’ve never been that interested in the older generations of jet aircraft, but this was fantastically informative. A really great exploration into an era that was filled with such ground breaking concepts and research. I’ll definitely be looking further into your channel. 👍
With the design elements we wanted to discuss, the F-101 was more conservative and we decided to focus on the other aircraft. I have a CF-101 video in a very early planning stage. I will return to the Voodoo. :)
Back in the day, when the rocket sled research was being conducted at Edwards AFB, the F 107 ejection system was tested and found to have some contact with the inlet above certain speeds. The seat would be sent into a back flip spin and that was problematic. I learned this from one of the engineers who worked at the sled track facility. He was father to a classmate in my high school. He took me along with his son to the facility on a weekend to get something caught up work wise. Later on, the track at Edwards was shut down and the track sections were shipped to New Mexico to add to the track at Holloman AFB. Pima is a fantastic collection of all kinds of aircraft. Schedule about 3 days to see it all.
I've spent two full weeks with unlimited access at Pima over the last couple of years and still haven't seen it all! So I'm heading back in the fall. :)
To be fair with the F-104. Just remember this. Its reputation as a widow maker is much more nuanced than just saying it was a bad design. Actually it was a very good design, it flew wonderfully well, and it was very very safe IF YOU KNEW HOW TO TRAIN the young and as importantly experienced high time pilots how to do so. The issue was the F-104’s first flight was March 1954!!!!! Literally this aircraft was being flown by WW2 pilots who’s basic training was in a steerman, advanced training was in a T-6 and their combat missions were in P-47, P-51, P-38 etc…., none of the training or experience of these pilots could possibly prepare them for the F-104! The earlier operators had horribly inadequate training and the attitude of the senior flight instructor set the wrong attitude for the safety of flight. Here is the amazing thing about the f-104, once the right people were put into place to develop procedures, limitations and maintenance programs the safety record fell closer inline with other century fighters like the F-105, F-100, cutting edge platforms of its era. The Spanish and Italians had incredible safety record and so did several other nations. In all the US, Germany, Canada, Spain, Italy, Turkey, Belgium, Denmark, Greece, Japan, Jordan, Netherlands, Norway, Pakistan, and Taiwan operated 2578 of these aircraft from 1958-2004! There are still private operators using these aircraft for air shows, testing equipment, and NASA used for a long time as chase planes.
Rather disappointed in the curt dismissal of the F-111. It was still in the older design philosophy of the 60's; purpose-built for one job. It was when it was shoehorned into other roles that it fell on its' face. When you left it to do its intended job, it performed admirably. Just ask the Iraqi tankers about it on "The Road of Death". The only comparable aircraft in mission type was the "Iron Tadpole" aka the Grumman A-6 Intruder. Both aircraft were all-weather day or night bombers, but the F-111 had almost double the weapons capacity, terrain following radar, much better bomb-nav suite, and almost 300 mph faster at sea level. No one complains about the A-6. I am slightly biased since I was a crew chief on F-111A's in the 80's. My bird, SN 67-0100 is a gate guard at Nellis.
I'm afraid, from the outside especally here in the UK, the politics of the F-111 is such that it leads to the curt comments! As for the A-6, I could talk to someone about that aircraft all day.
@@damcasterspod I'm sorry,...... I forgot about the poor record of our country's actions in regard to the "Switchblade Edsel" being sold to England. Also some of our aviation corporations were not really playing fair at that time with your government.
That is ok! I'm not sure TSR-2 would have been everything it is thought it could have been. But the "swiss army knife" sales pitch for multi-role aircraft is always sprikled liberally with wishful thinking. See F-35 today.
Back in the 70's I would watch that particular F-104 when I was a child growing up in San Juan when it was part of the Puerto Rico Air National Guard. One of the things that kindled my thirst for flying and my 40-yr career as a military and airline pilot.
It was the F-4 Phantom II that was the joint service fighter mandated by McNamara. He also ordered the destruction of all of the tooling for the SR-71, the A-12 and related. Finance guy, no practical real world experience except in appliances.
Great explanations in super sonic air flow my dad worked for Kelly Johnson and I worked for Ben Rich we were a Lockheed Family but didn't talk about work mutch for obvious reasons thanks
@@damcasterspod Oh. OK. I was wondering why so little time was spent on the Voodoo. I imagined it over there saying sadly "hey - what about me? Am I chopped liver over here?".
Nice info, I love the info on intake development. Got to say the F105 was way underrated. It was a bomber that could be a fighter. It’s gum kills say something about its actual capabilities as a fighter
The f105 and it's pilots were absolutely screwed over, the story is tragic. There was a time when the meet sortie quotas f105 were being sent with one or two bombs, there's an interview with a thud pilot who recounts one of these single bomb thuds being shot down and him asking was the bullshit target worth this one bomb and this pilot and planes life?
The F-106 tail number 90003 was stationed with me at Minot before it was retired the last one left Mar-April 1984 it was a cold and rainy day like Minot was crying for loosing her the F-15 was a pig to compared her
I don’t know it’s the origin, but Monogram models in the 60s heavily advertised their 100s model kits as “the century series” encouraging people to build them all.
Really well done and interesting video. Small point on Area rule was discovered by the Germans and used on their first jet fighters like the ME262. An interesting point on the 104 is that the faster you went the faster it accelerated. It would slow a bit through transonic regime. After about 1.2 Mach the drag curve reduced and the ram effect increased engine thrust. Temperature was the limiting factor not thrust or aerodynamics. If memory services max temperature was 121 degrees C. The big red slow light would come on.
The F-106's variable intake ramp is called a vari-ramp, by the way. It's variable in movement via the air data computer in the nose wheel well, which gets its data from the pitot tube(s).
Just to add, the 104 had the leading edge droop for landing as well. That coupled with the boundary layer control on the flaps lowered the approach speed to 180 or so knots, iirc, but the engine needed to be above 80% for the BLC to work. Otherwise the approach speed increased to over 200knots
The F104s blown flap was also problematic when only 1 of the valves opened (there was one for each side). That had a tendency to flip the plane over and dive it into the ground.
I'm working on a couple videos looking at the Arrow, both the aircarft and the intel that lead to the decision to cancel the program. Hopefully they will come in the autumn.
@@damcasterspod would be an interesting video. I don’t believe the F-4 is given enough love and respect as most see it as the “ugly duckling” whereas I see it as a beautiful fighter that managed to accomplish a lot during its career. The records it set were amazing especially for the time and it was the lone of the last of a true pilots aircraft. Meaning a computer didn’t actually fly the aircraft. No offense to fighter pilots of today but they are there to do nothing more than to tell the fighter what they want to do and then the computers will decide if it’s allowed or not.
The D21 did work, the USAF didn't want to pay for another mother ship after it lost one. The problems could have been worked out but the cost wasn't worth what advantage of having it. Some people claim that there were successful D21 flights and the D21 was successfully recovered by a C130 towing a hook on cable like some of the early Mercury capsule recoveries. There are even stories of successful operational missions of D21. The real killer of the D21 was the development of satellite reconnaissance and the fact the SR71 never got shot down. The most amazing thing about the YF12A is that design work was started during the end of the blank check period before McNamara ended that too expensive era. It did take a long time to get to 1st prototype because Lockheed had to develop so much new technology. Unlike the U2, the YF12A was a giant leap forward.
I would suggest checking out our chat with Paul Crickmore on the SR-71 and D-21. While it flew successfully, the operational surveillance flights over China were a disaster so therefore the drone cannot be considered a success.
@@damcasterspod I agree that the D21 was not a success. I liked the idea of putting on top of a rocket booster and launching it vertically. With the C130 recovery. It still would not be coat effective and the SR71 and satellites already filled the D21 role.
The F110 actually did happen, at least on paper anyway. The USAF tried to call it the F110 and then decided to just go ahead and call their F110 the F4 Phantom like the USN did.
The redesignation was part of the Tri-Service aircraft designation system in 1962 which standardised all US combat aircraft going forward. Based on the F-110 never flew in service and because of that we decided that it didn't count in this discussion. But, it is not that there isn't a lot of love for the F-4 on the channel, as you can see where I hijack my discussion with Eileen Bkorkman to talk all things Phantom at Edwards.
Interesting...The Century Series were "very unsuccessful, in general" with snickering in the background from the host...and, we are to believe that USAF design specifications for these airplanes consisted of one line, "we don't care what they are", according to your guest. Really? Let's talk about what the designers of these airplanes actually accomplished, and what resulted. The F-100 was able to attain high speeds not just because of the wing sweep and thrust from the J-57 engine (which BTW was a very successful engine in military and civilian usage for decades). No, it was also the amazing wing structure of the F-100 which employed thick milled skins and relatively few parts, a technology rooted in the F-86 which countries with lesser industrial capacity than the United States could not duplicate. What was the importance of this technology?... achieving an extremely smooth and EVEN surface built to incredibly close tolerances was necessary to avoid the multitude of small, unstable shock waves that plagued wings of aircraft like the British Supermarine Swift which was built in many ways just like the Spitfire, with riveted together ribs and stringers under a thin skin. Okay, let's continue. The F-101 became an effective aircraft as a reconnaissance platform in Vietnam, and the overall design as an interceptor was not retired until the early 1980's. The F-102A, though not a world beater, was nevertheless an aerodynamics pioneer. The F-104 was one of the most widely used NATO fighters in the history of the modern military, not retired until the early 2000's, and BTW the downward ejection seat wasn't around that long and has nothing to do with the rest of the airplane design, so why mention it? Moreover, counter to your guest's claims that many aircraft of "this vintage" had downward ejection seats, I cannot think of one other than the 104, certainly not in a major operational aircraft, and at minimum, "many" is ridiculous. Moving on, the F-105 was deadly as a bomb truck and a Wild Weasel aircraft, not to mention faster than just about anything on the deck with no ordinance, which is great for egress. Yes, it had quirks like a hydraulic system vulnerable to combat damage, but it was a successful aircraft. Further, according to articles I've read, pilots praised its capabilities and flying qualities. The 105 continued in service until it was basically worn out in 1984. Finally, there is the F-106. Highly complex niche airplane that many countries would likely not be able to support, but it worked as a deterrent to nuclear aggressors, and was not retired as an interceptor until 1988. Late in life it also proved to be a capable dogfighter, and a gun was added. As a summing point, the Century Series aircraft individually were in service for anywhere from 25 to more than 50 years. What among all of this screams "very unsuccessful" (snicker snicker) and if so, then compared to what else? Finally, I cannot finish without condemning the idea some people cling to that the F4H, F-4, "F-110" was a Century Series airplane. Being of Navy origin, it is disqualified from that title outright and with the most basic common sense. I can imagine that the USAF was all too happy to separate the F-4 from the true Century Series line when the designations were changed in 1962.
Well, the snigger did get you to comment, thanks for the engagement! ;) beyond that, I don't think you watched to the end based upon your comments, especally around the F-105 which we covered in depth with Gen Russ Violett, who flew two tours on the Thud and then channeled that experierence into guided weapons development. Regardless, thanks for the comment and I hope you find the interview with Russ more to your liking.
Hi Guys! Great episode. When I was a young man, I built lots of models of the Century Series aircraft. They were all in use at the time. Good info here. Thanks for making this.
F106 lasted into the 80s, as did the F105, F104 lasted into the 2000s, F101 lasted until 1984, I'm not sure what you mean with short service lives? 🤷♂️
Fantastic video, and I am sad the Voodoo got passed over, although i understand for the wings, and it's nice seeing 3 of my favorite jets, the 104, 106, and 101
I completely agree with the previous commentator stating that these aircraft were NOT unsuccessful and some did see combat and successfully completed their missions. Inaccurate and uninformed video 👎🏻
How about the F111 it was also a century series fighter bomber jet and the F-4 Phantom for the airforce which started out as the F110 but thanks to the defence secretary MacNamarra he changed the aircraft designations before the first delivery of the F-110A
The F-111 was not technically in the 50s bracket we were focusing on plus I'm not a fan so we skipped it. The F-4 was redesignated before it entered service, therefore we didn't feel it truly counted. We have talked a lot about the Phantom on the pod, especally in our chat with Eileen Bjorkman who was a backseater at Edwards on the F-4.
The F-4 isn't considered to be century series and neither is the F-111. The Phantom crops up often on the channel, so haven't missed discussing. She does need a full video though. As for the F-111, outside of the politics of the aircraft, it doesn't interest me.
Austraila made superb use of the F-111. The memory of the aircraft is much less rosy here in the UK where the F-111K cost the Navy her strike carriers and the RAF the TSR-2. Richard Moore's article on the subject in the Winter 2015 issue of Air Power Review is a facinating read.
Good question! A number were not (I believe the chinese still have them). Off the top of my head, we cover the D-21 in more depth in our SR-71 episdoe with Paul Crickmore who is The Guy on the subject.
It is the way of things I'm afraid. The entry fee is comparable to IWM Duxford and elsewhere. I would recommend checking out our interview with Pima's CEO Scott Marchand to get a look at what goes on behind the scenes.
While technically in the Century Series as F-110 it was redesignated and as such doesn't fit with the accepted convention. Lots of love for the F-4 on the channel, as the video with Eilen Bjorkman showed!
Don't give me an F one oh 4 with hardly any wings at all It goes real fast, but you'll die in blast, Don't give me an F one oh 4, no! Engine with cockpit and control fins. Manned missle
I always wondered about the 102 and 106 as dogfighters. When I was young I lived on Elmendorf AFB where the resident interceptor squadron flew the 102A. At an airshow one year a local aviator named Red Dodge flew his P-51 in a mock dogfight against a 102 and it really didn't look good for the 102. Of course recips against jets and bullets against air to air missiles isn't really a dogfight but jet against jet looks more like a regional conflict compared to old school fighter battles.
F107 doesn't have intakes on sides because the intakes would interfere with the wing structure. A top intake doesn't cause these problems and doesn't vacuum objects off the runway. The scarry part for the pilot is ejection and being sucked in.
We needed to trim one for time and the Voodoo took the hit. We will return to it in the future when we look at the CF-101! There is a lot of love out there for the 101.
I’m pretty sure the F-110/F-4 Phantom II was turned into McNamara’s one fighter fits all, minus a gun. The F-111 was too heavy to land on an aircraft carrier which caused Grumman to create the F-14 Tomcat for fleet air superiority. This in turn leads to the Air Forces fighter mafia craving what became the F-15 and F-16…
The F-111 wasn't too heavy for carriers. It completed it's carrier trials without any problems. The Navy just used the weight issue as an excuse to cancel it.
We were holding short of the runway at Edwards waiting for takeoff and F-104's were doing touch and go landings. They would extend the gear on short final which I though was interesting not exactly sure why they were doing this? This was in 1966
@@damcasterspod The were putting the gear down at 200 feet something in my 62 years of flying airplanes is something that I have never seen before or since.
They were NOT un-successful. All groundbreaking in their own right. some served with honor in 'Nam. Led the way to better planes.
Joe's point, which he expands on throughout the video, is from that intial design perspective. Yes, some of them had long careers but it also took a while to work out the quirks. We are big fans of F-105 here and have interviewed Gen Russ Violett about his two tours on the aircraft.
I don’t think they were unsuccessful. The F-100 was outstanding at the beginning of the American involvement in Vietnam. It was moved to other missions and served well for the duration. The F-105 Thunderchief also was a workhorse in Vietnam. The Century series fighters were developed in the 50’s at a time when intercepting Soviet nuclear bombers was the big priority. The fact that they did as well as they did in a completely different kind of war in the mid-60’s in Vietnam is kind of impressive to me.
G'day,
A couple of points.
Vietnam's AmeriKan War was
Fought because Robert MacNamara publicised the mistaken US Navy Midshipman's fear that 2 Dolphins in the Tonkin Gulf
MIGHT Be
"Communist Torpedoes"...;
But
MacNamara and Kissinger then kept the
Updated report - which arrived in Washington, from CINCPAC in Hawaii, 35 minutes later telling that the Not-Torpedoes were actual
Dolphins..., a
Secret which lasted until the release of
The Pentagon Papers in 1971 or '72.
Therefore, thus, and because,
Vietnam fought an
Honest
Honourable
War, defending against an
Invading Nation whose
ENTIRE "justification" for
Launching and waging and making
War..., was a
Dirty filthy transparently fraudulent
Lie.
And so, there was
NOTHING Done by
Anyone who fought for
ANZUS
In Vietnam,
That was in any way, shape, or form,
"Honourable".
Everyone in ANZUS was out there,
Killing Strangers for pay because their own
Politicians pretended that their
"National Honour"
Demanded that SOMEONE had to try not to die,
While living in a
Ditch..., fighting to control a Crossroads - in the
Muddle of nowhere on Earth that anybody in their own Hometown, had ever previously heard of...
Such is life,
Have a good one...
Stay safe.
;-p
Ciao !
Yeah that just made me quit watching, stupid comment
T37 led to better planes.
The F-106 was in service until 1988 with the ANG.
My favorite Century Series is the F106. It looked great (especially in test range orange) flew great and was operational until displaced by the F15 in the 1980s! Only the F104 stayed in service longer and F106 didn't have the nasty characteristics that killed so many German F104 pilots.
Of course it only helped that my dad knew most of the engineers who designed the F104. Another reason it is seared into my brain is getting bused by one flying 9 foot above the road we were driving on. Dad told me it was an F106 that was testing ground hugging radar out of China Lake NAS. Instead of flying over us (that would probably blown us off the road) the F106 banked left then right. When he passed us his wing was 3 feet above the ground in a 90 degree bank and I could see the top of the pilots helmet. The F106 then pulled in front of us and disappeared disappeared after flew over an approximately 10 foot tall hill on the road. It was a thrill of my life and I latter found that most jets of the era would probably have fallen appart trying that maneuver.
Yes give me an F106
With no gun just rockets
It flies real fast
Destroys enemies with an expensive missile, can dog fight but doesn't,
Just comes home with no rockets and bingo fuel, and a happy pilot who sees love after every mission.
The F106 was retained in the USA as an interceptor. It's missile system was the 1st of its kind and designed to shoot down Soviet bombers without getting lose enough to the bomber to be at risk. It was only exceeded by the YF12A which didn't go into serial production production. It's missile was the basis for that used on F14. While the F4 was superior in almost every way, there were never enough F4s to replace the F106 in homeland interceptor role.
The F106 was too expensive to build, but those that were built kept on flying .
The six was the favorite mount of ADC pilots. Not only does it still hold the world record speed of single engine turbines at 1,525 mph, it also had "supercruise" ability 40 years before the F-22. It was said that the six could get there the fastest, with the mostest! In combat loadout, it was faster than the F-4 as it remained aerodynamically clean. Nothing slows plane down faster than hanging ordinance out in the wind! The six deserved a few more minutes than what she got here.😢
What a thrill that close buzz was. Wish it could have happened to me! I like the whole series, but I think I like the 106 best. From what I understand, F-15 can't get inside of in a turn contest. I heard that from a retired ANG pilot.
Yes the F 106 was the best,not easy to work on but definitely the best
What an utterly fabulous museum. Also, the knowledge of the presenter is equally amazing, excellent post, and now I'm hooked.
I loved having Joe on here and how he can explain aerodynamics in laymen’s terms while showing innovations on existing century fighters. I do wish he would have spent more time on The Six. Still the fastest single engine jet ever and had about 30 years of frontline service with the U.S. Air Force. It truly was something special
Century series fighters were always my favorite period of aircraft, especially the Lockheed F-104 Starfighter. But I always favor anything designed by Kelly Johnson. If memory serves, I believe crews working on the F-104 had to put wing edge gaurds on the front and trailing parts of the wings to minimize injuries, those things were so sharp. a shame the F-108 Rapier was never produced. I think it would have been an interesting addition to the Century series. I look forward to you guy's next video.
Those bumps on the rear fuselage of the F102 are called Whitcombe bodies I believe, linked to the area rule and named after the NACA engineer who developed them. The Handley Page Victor bomber in the UK also had these on the trailing edge of the swept wings.
Whitcombe a NACA engineer?
Check out ‘Kuchemann carrots’. You correct they streamline according to area rule. Convair 990 another (extreme) example.
A lesson here is Whitcomb visualizing the flow, a bit of a story in itself. His later contribution =winglets= ubiquitous nowadays. Great contributions to flight..
This man knows his aerodynamics. Not many people do. Very cool! Thanks!
Joe did an excellent articulation of the design principles and philosophies. That is the truly interesting subject Which doesn't often get discussed.
Why so dismissive of the Voodoo? It was just as innovative than the others, was honest on it's top speed (way faster than the Hun or the 102) and it's planform evolved into the F4 - so pretty important right there. Plus the recon bird did solid service in Nam.
I did the F-101 dirty here as I hope to return to it with a look at CF-101 and the politics around that. So it will get a look in in the future.
I worked on the flightdeck of aircraft carriers during the 1970's. We were warned about standing near the intake of a jet, even off to the side as you could get sucked in. The F-8 and A-7 were especially notorious for this.
The F-106 was an absolute wonderful aircraft to fly according to pilots who flew it along with aircraft like the F-4, f-105.
I toured Pima two years ago on a brutally hot day. The heat dictated a trolly tour, so I didn't get to see many of the aircraft as I would have liked; still, it was quite interesting.
The ones that lasted were F-100 and F-106.
F-104G/S stayed in service outside the USA.
The F-107 was very ugly, right up there with the Boeing X-32.
F101 was in movie the Russians are Coming. Great aircraft with Canadians.
I understand that the F4 Phantom was originally called the F-110. I early films I've seen it actually called it the F-110.
It was nominally the F-110 Spectre but the dropped the designation early on.
wasn't there a heated discussion about funding between the F4H and the F-110 (Senate/Congress?) which contributed towards the push for a common designation
Yes, it lead to the Tri-Service Designation System in the early 60's which is still followed today (I think).
That was great. Please bring Joe and the airplanes in the museum for more videos.
That's the oldest SR-71 that still exists
For me at least this era is the magic age of aviation. Beyond the Century Serious there's the B-36, B-47 and B-58 Hustler which are all fascinating airframes. There's also something about the way they all look that's really athletically pleasing.
Complertely agree. We've covered the B-58 on the channel, will be discussing the impact of the B-47 on the B-52 in our Boeing's Fortresses series starting on Thursday as well. The B-36 is an asthetic abomination though! 😄
Outstanding!!! Audio levels are perfect now, I might add!
Fab!
Pima has a B-58. Nothing faster when it was operational.
Knew a ww2 Ace,, P51 Mustang pilot,, He became a shooting star fighter test pilot.After ww2,, Silky Morris was his name...
That is a fantastic name
IIRC the inlet had to be on top because otherwise it would interfere with launching the Genie air-to-air nuclear missile.
Missing 3, the F-110, F-111, and F-117. Technically speaking, they were not part of it, the F-110 was the AF model of the Navy F-4 but was later renamed back to standardize the numbering system, F-111 was never used as a fighter but as a bomber with the FB-111 having a heavier load capacity, and the F-117 designed years later, also as a fighter/bomber. But they could explain all that at the museum. Airplane nuts (like me) love the background details.
We covered the F-117 from a pilot's perspective earlier with our interview with Jon Boyd. As for the F-4, we haven't done anything specific, yet, but we will. I'm not a fan of the F-111 so I've avoided it so far!
When you were blowing through the "one airplane thing", you passed over one of the best airplanes of that whole eara, the F4, how did you do that?
Hi, we felt that following the 1962 Tri-Service designation scheme, the F-4 didn't 'technically, fall within the traditional Century Series timeframe. Plus, as you saw with the video, it would have been a disservice ti the F-4 to only give it a few minutes. There needs to be a proper, multi-part look at the Phantom and it is in a draft script stage at the moment. Hope that explains things a bit. 🙂
As you guys forgot the F-110, the ( Original Design Number for what would become the Phantastic F-4 Phantom ) from your "Century Series," How about it's OWN video with all the good , bad and Double Ugly, what some would call a real turkey, but most recognize as the Worlds best Jet fighter for more then 50 years, America at it's finest, when you say Jet Fighter, the F-4 is what comes to mind! And if we were to REALLY split hairs here, you should really do a video on the often forgotten F8U Crusader, the Last Gun Fighter, also a part of the Century series, but it's own special blend of Navy Cool!
As I imply in the introduction, the F-110 didn't really happen as it morphed into the F-4, which is not generally considered to be Century Series. Now, that doesn't mean there isn't a lot of love on the channel for the Phantom (see our interview with Eileen Bjorkman), it just doesn't fit in this discuss. Plus the F-4 is far too big a subject to give justice too when considering all the aircraft we did chat about.
The missing ones were the F-103, which he mentioned, the F-109, which was the proposed designation for what became the F-101B, the F-108 Rapier (I wish that one had flown!), and the F-110 Specter, which was the Air Force's original designation for the Navy's F4H-1 Phantom II.
Good video. I was a little disappointed that he never mentioned any advanced features of the electronics through the years. The F-86 gunsight. The 105's terrain following computer. The 106's ability to relay information to other planes and the ground to coordinate attacks. And that the 104 had none of that since it was designed from the start to be an absolute hot rod. And it was the longest flying of the series being retired by the Italians in 2004.
We took a lot on trying to cover as many as we need and we decided to stick to the aerodynamic on this video. So many facinating features on each of the aircraft we could have disapeared down any number of rabbit holes. Did you see the Italians have got one of their F-104s flying again?
Excellent video, so interesting! I’ve never been that interested in the older generations of jet aircraft, but this was fantastically informative. A really great exploration into an era that was filled with such ground breaking concepts and research. I’ll definitely be looking further into your channel. 👍
Thanks for watching and I hope you find more interesting things on the channel.
1:16 I'll take one of those, 2 of those, 1 of that one......
Gladly shared. Intake and wing shape and how they relate to flight regime are covered very well here. Excellent coverage.
Great explanations - perfect video !
Glad you liked it!
Enjoyed the video...seem to have neglected the F-101 Voodoo, and one was visible behind you Dane
With the design elements we wanted to discuss, the F-101 was more conservative and we decided to focus on the other aircraft. I have a CF-101 video in a very early planning stage. I will return to the Voodoo. :)
I live in Tucson, the F-100 in the Pima museum, came from our unit the 162nd. ANG. I flew in the "F' models several times.
I never noticed it before. Take the F-102's intake and turn it 90 degrees, and voila! you have the F-16's undernose intake/inlet.
Less we forget the F-100 Super "Sabre Dance" were Charles Bronson met his end in the 1961 movie X-15.
Back in the day, when the rocket sled research was being conducted at Edwards AFB, the F 107 ejection system was tested and found to have some contact with the inlet above certain speeds. The seat would be sent into a back flip spin and that was problematic. I learned this from one of the engineers who worked at the sled track facility. He was father to a classmate in my high school. He took me along with his son to the facility on a weekend to get something caught up work wise. Later on, the track at Edwards was shut down and the track sections were shipped to New Mexico to add to the track at Holloman AFB. Pima is a fantastic collection of all kinds of aircraft. Schedule about 3 days to see it all.
I've spent two full weeks with unlimited access at Pima over the last couple of years and still haven't seen it all! So I'm heading back in the fall. :)
To be fair with the F-104. Just remember this. Its reputation as a widow maker is much more nuanced than just saying it was a bad design. Actually it was a very good design, it flew wonderfully well, and it was very very safe IF YOU KNEW HOW TO TRAIN the young and as importantly experienced high time pilots how to do so. The issue was the F-104’s first flight was March 1954!!!!! Literally this aircraft was being flown by WW2 pilots who’s basic training was in a steerman, advanced training was in a T-6 and their combat missions were in P-47, P-51, P-38 etc…., none of the training or experience of these pilots could possibly prepare them for the F-104! The earlier operators had horribly inadequate training and the attitude of the senior flight instructor set the wrong attitude for the safety of flight.
Here is the amazing thing about the f-104, once the right people were put into place to develop procedures, limitations and maintenance programs the safety record fell closer inline with other century fighters like the F-105, F-100, cutting edge platforms of its era. The Spanish and Italians had incredible safety record and so did several other nations. In all the US, Germany, Canada, Spain, Italy, Turkey, Belgium, Denmark, Greece, Japan, Jordan, Netherlands, Norway, Pakistan, and Taiwan operated 2578 of these aircraft from 1958-2004! There are still private operators using these aircraft for air shows, testing equipment, and NASA used for a long time as chase planes.
Rather disappointed in the curt dismissal of the F-111. It was still in the older design philosophy of the 60's; purpose-built for one job. It was when it was shoehorned into other roles that it fell on its' face. When you left it to do its intended job, it performed admirably. Just ask the Iraqi tankers about it on "The Road of Death".
The only comparable aircraft in mission type was the "Iron Tadpole" aka the Grumman A-6 Intruder. Both aircraft were all-weather day or night bombers, but the F-111 had almost double the weapons capacity, terrain following radar, much better bomb-nav suite, and almost 300 mph faster at sea level.
No one complains about the A-6.
I am slightly biased since I was a crew chief on F-111A's in the 80's.
My bird, SN 67-0100 is a gate guard at Nellis.
I'm afraid, from the outside especally here in the UK, the politics of the F-111 is such that it leads to the curt comments! As for the A-6, I could talk to someone about that aircraft all day.
@@damcasterspod I'm sorry,...... I forgot about the poor record of our country's actions in regard to the "Switchblade Edsel" being sold to England. Also some of our aviation corporations were not really playing fair at that time with your government.
That is ok! I'm not sure TSR-2 would have been everything it is thought it could have been. But the "swiss army knife" sales pitch for multi-role aircraft is always sprikled liberally with wishful thinking. See F-35 today.
Back in the 70's I would watch that particular F-104 when I was a child growing up in San Juan when it was part of the Puerto Rico Air National Guard. One of the things that kindled my thirst for flying and my 40-yr career as a military and airline pilot.
It was the F-4 Phantom II that was the joint service fighter mandated by McNamara. He also ordered the destruction of all of the tooling for the SR-71, the A-12 and related. Finance guy, no practical real world experience except in appliances.
Great explanations in super sonic air flow my dad worked for Kelly Johnson and I worked for Ben Rich we were a Lockheed Family but didn't talk about work mutch for obvious reasons thanks
Been to Pima twice. Bucket list checked off for sure! One of the best aviation vids on TH-cam so far! Wish you went more over the F-101, but hey...
I have a plan to look at the CF-101 in more detail. On the day, we didn't have as much time as we had hoped so the Voodoo was the one that got cut.
@@damcasterspod Oh. OK. I was wondering why so little time was spent on the Voodoo. I imagined it over there saying sadly "hey - what about me? Am I chopped liver over here?".
It certainly isn't as sexy as say a F-104 or F-106 but she'll get her turn.
Nice info, I love the info on intake development. Got to say the F105 was way underrated. It was a bomber that could be a fighter. It’s gum kills say something about its actual capabilities as a fighter
Agree with you on the F-105. Have you watched our interview with Gen Russ Violette on the channel? He did two tours on Thuds in Vietnam.
The f105 and it's pilots were absolutely screwed over, the story is tragic. There was a time when the meet sortie quotas f105 were being sent with one or two bombs, there's an interview with a thud pilot who recounts one of these single bomb thuds being shot down and him asking was the bullshit target worth this one bomb and this pilot and planes life?
The F-106 tail number 90003 was stationed with me at Minot before it was retired the last one left Mar-April 1984 it was a cold and rainy day like Minot was crying for loosing her the F-15 was a pig to compared her
All works of art in their own way. The f105 is ptobably my favorite but they are all deaf sexy
I don’t know it’s the origin, but Monogram models in the 60s heavily advertised their 100s model kits as “the century series” encouraging people to build them all.
Really well done and interesting video.
Small point on Area rule was discovered by the Germans and used on their first jet fighters like the ME262.
An interesting point on the 104 is that the faster you went the faster it accelerated.
It would slow a bit through transonic regime.
After about 1.2 Mach the drag curve reduced and the ram effect increased engine thrust.
Temperature was the limiting factor not thrust or aerodynamics.
If memory services max temperature was 121 degrees C.
The big red slow light would come on.
The F-106's variable intake ramp is called a vari-ramp, by the way. It's variable in movement via the air data computer in the nose wheel well, which gets its data from the pitot tube(s).
Just to add, the 104 had the leading edge droop for landing as well. That coupled with the boundary layer control on the flaps lowered the approach speed to 180 or so knots, iirc, but the engine needed to be above 80% for the BLC to work. Otherwise the approach speed increased to over 200knots
F-105 and F-106 being the best at what they were designed to do: low level tactical nuclear delivery and strategic interception respectively.
Again do your research the D-21was later released from B-52s it didn't need to be supersonic to be launched
The F104s blown flap was also problematic when only 1 of the valves opened (there was one for each side). That had a tendency to flip the plane over and dive it into the ground.
Love to hear your comments on the avroe arrow
I'm working on a couple videos looking at the Arrow, both the aircarft and the intel that lead to the decision to cancel the program. Hopefully they will come in the autumn.
Went from talking about the F-111 to the F-14 and F-15 and completely skipped the amazing F-4.
The F-4 has featured on the pod and will again, but not being technically century series we decided it needed a future episode on its own.
@@damcasterspod meant no disrespect lol. It was more like my poor F-4 was left out.
Love the F-4! Your comment and those of others means I need to get a deep dive into the aircraft done soon.
@@damcasterspod would be an interesting video. I don’t believe the F-4 is given enough love and respect as most see it as the “ugly duckling” whereas I see it as a beautiful fighter that managed to accomplish a lot during its career. The records it set were amazing especially for the time and it was the lone of the last of a true pilots aircraft. Meaning a computer didn’t actually fly the aircraft. No offense to fighter pilots of today but they are there to do nothing more than to tell the fighter what they want to do and then the computers will decide if it’s allowed or not.
The D21 did work, the USAF didn't want to pay for another mother ship after it lost one. The problems could have been worked out but the cost wasn't worth what advantage of having it. Some people claim that there were successful D21 flights and the D21 was successfully recovered by a C130 towing a hook on cable like some of the early Mercury capsule recoveries. There are even stories of successful operational missions of D21. The real killer of the D21 was the development of satellite reconnaissance and the fact the SR71 never got shot down.
The most amazing thing about the YF12A is that design work was started during the end of the blank check period before McNamara ended that too expensive era. It did take a long time to get to 1st prototype because Lockheed had to develop so much new technology. Unlike the U2, the YF12A was a giant leap forward.
I would suggest checking out our chat with Paul Crickmore on the SR-71 and D-21. While it flew successfully, the operational surveillance flights over China were a disaster so therefore the drone cannot be considered a success.
@@damcasterspod I agree that the D21 was not a success. I liked the idea of putting on top of a rocket booster and launching it vertically. With the C130 recovery. It still would not be coat effective and the SR71 and satellites already filled the D21 role.
My cousin was a test pilot who almost lost his life doing aileron flutter test on the later extended fuselage F104.
I heard the F-111 was almost as fast as the SR-71...you just didnt want to fly it that fast because it wasnt built to be that fast
The F-107 is tail #55118. You can see several pictures of it from 1956-7 on Wikipedia.
Fascinating stuff! Off to avoid some lateral flow
I had models of all of them when I was a kid. Got to see some of them in the flesh when I was in the military.
The F110 actually did happen, at least on paper anyway. The USAF tried to call it the F110 and then decided to just go ahead and call their F110 the F4 Phantom like the USN did.
The redesignation was part of the Tri-Service aircraft designation system in 1962 which standardised all US combat aircraft going forward. Based on the F-110 never flew in service and because of that we decided that it didn't count in this discussion. But, it is not that there isn't a lot of love for the F-4 on the channel, as you can see where I hijack my discussion with Eileen Bkorkman to talk all things Phantom at Edwards.
And Minot was the last active duty unit to fly her not a guard unit that unit was in Fargo flying F-4s
One more thing about the F-107 inlet location: abominable pilot visibility.
Something was always closing on the pilots six o’clock: the inlet!
@@johnrusac6894 Yeah - and this from the company that gave us the P-51 Mustang.
Convair was way ahead of the competition.
Excellent tour. I have a nodding acquaintance with some of these ideas but. . .learn something new every day.
Glad you enjoyed it!
Interesting...The Century Series were "very unsuccessful, in general" with snickering in the background from the host...and, we are to believe that USAF design specifications for these airplanes consisted of one line, "we don't care what they are", according to your guest. Really? Let's talk about what the designers of these airplanes actually accomplished, and what resulted. The F-100 was able to attain high speeds not just because of the wing sweep and thrust from the J-57 engine (which BTW was a very successful engine in military and civilian usage for decades). No, it was also the amazing wing structure of the F-100 which employed thick milled skins and relatively few parts, a technology rooted in the F-86 which countries with lesser industrial capacity than the United States could not duplicate. What was the importance of this technology?... achieving an extremely smooth and EVEN surface built to incredibly close tolerances was necessary to avoid the multitude of small, unstable shock waves that plagued wings of aircraft like the British Supermarine Swift which was built in many ways just like the Spitfire, with riveted together ribs and stringers under a thin skin. Okay, let's continue. The F-101 became an effective aircraft as a reconnaissance platform in Vietnam, and the overall design as an interceptor was not retired until the early 1980's. The F-102A, though not a world beater, was nevertheless an aerodynamics pioneer. The F-104 was one of the most widely used NATO fighters in the history of the modern military, not retired until the early 2000's, and BTW the downward ejection seat wasn't around that long and has nothing to do with the rest of the airplane design, so why mention it? Moreover, counter to your guest's claims that many aircraft of "this vintage" had downward ejection seats, I cannot think of one other than the 104, certainly not in a major operational aircraft, and at minimum, "many" is ridiculous. Moving on, the F-105 was deadly as a bomb truck and a Wild Weasel aircraft, not to mention faster than just about anything on the deck with no ordinance, which is great for egress. Yes, it had quirks like a hydraulic system vulnerable to combat damage, but it was a successful aircraft. Further, according to articles I've read, pilots praised its capabilities and flying qualities. The 105 continued in service until it was basically worn out in 1984. Finally, there is the F-106. Highly complex niche airplane that many countries would likely not be able to support, but it worked as a deterrent to nuclear aggressors, and was not retired as an interceptor until 1988. Late in life it also proved to be a capable dogfighter, and a gun was added. As a summing point, the Century Series aircraft individually were in service for anywhere from 25 to more than 50 years. What among all of this screams "very unsuccessful" (snicker snicker) and if so, then compared to what else? Finally, I cannot finish without condemning the idea some people cling to that the F4H, F-4, "F-110" was a Century Series airplane. Being of Navy origin, it is disqualified from that title outright and with the most basic common sense. I can imagine that the USAF was all too happy to separate the F-4 from the true Century Series line when the designations were changed in 1962.
Well, the snigger did get you to comment, thanks for the engagement! ;) beyond that, I don't think you watched to the end based upon your comments, especally around the F-105 which we covered in depth with Gen Russ Violett, who flew two tours on the Thud and then channeled that experierence into guided weapons development. Regardless, thanks for the comment and I hope you find the interview with Russ more to your liking.
The F-106 was in service for over 20 years
Pretty stark omission.
But not in frontline service for that time, which was the focus in this video. She did amazing service with the Guards units as you mention.
Hi Guys! Great episode. When I was a young man, I built lots of models of the Century Series aircraft. They were all in use at the time. Good info here. Thanks for making this.
F106 lasted into the 80s, as did the F105, F104 lasted into the 2000s, F101 lasted until 1984, I'm not sure what you mean with short service lives? 🤷♂️
Not as frontline USAF fighters, which was the point Joe was making.
Fantastic video, and I am sad the Voodoo got passed over, although i understand for the wings, and it's nice seeing 3 of my favorite jets, the 104, 106, and 101
Glad you enjoyed it! We will return for the 101 in a future episode
Where is the F-101?
We will return to the Voodoo in the future.
That dude is fantastic and really knows his shit
Very interesting and I want to go there! 👍
I completely agree with the previous commentator stating that these aircraft were NOT unsuccessful and some did see combat and successfully completed their missions. Inaccurate and uninformed video 👎🏻
Thanks for commenting. If you watch the entire thing, you will see Joe's basis for the comment.
Gents, I have to say that was a supremely interesting presentation.
I was like a kid rapt with interest listening to the pair of you. 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
Thanks for watching!
I've been in and around military aircraft for 50+ years. Still, I learned something here. Great video.
How about the F111 it was also a century series fighter bomber jet and the F-4 Phantom for the airforce which started out as the F110 but thanks to the defence secretary MacNamarra he changed the aircraft designations before the first delivery of the F-110A
The F-111 was not technically in the 50s bracket we were focusing on plus I'm not a fan so we skipped it. The F-4 was redesignated before it entered service, therefore we didn't feel it truly counted. We have talked a lot about the Phantom on the pod, especally in our chat with Eileen Bjorkman who was a backseater at Edwards on the F-4.
Awesome, and thank you!
First swept wing fighter? Me262 & Me163 would like a word......
Within the context of the video looking at US fighters, then Joe is correct
You missed out F110 (there was one in the background disguised as an F4) & F111, both of which are century series.
The F-4 isn't considered to be century series and neither is the F-111. The Phantom crops up often on the channel, so haven't missed discussing. She does need a full video though. As for the F-111, outside of the politics of the aircraft, it doesn't interest me.
The F-111 is much loved in Australia as a low level long range bomber. Since it's retirement Australia was left with no long range strike capability.
Austraila made superb use of the F-111. The memory of the aircraft is much less rosy here in the UK where the F-111K cost the Navy her strike carriers and the RAF the TSR-2. Richard Moore's article on the subject in the Winter 2015 issue of Air Power Review is a facinating read.
I'll look it up. It sounds interesting.
What I find amazing was that there there wasn't any electronic calculators. All math was preformed by human brains using slide rules.
The maths these teams did it certainly enough to blow my mathematically challenged brain for sure!
People think slide rules are unsophisticated, they are far from it and they engender a good grasp of function, scale and realistic precision.
Fantastic groundbreaking planes. Some of my favourites.
I find them fascinating! They all pushed the boundaries and led us to where we ended up, for better or worse, today.
How were the SR- 71's Drones recovered? Great history here- Thanks Matt!
Good question! A number were not (I believe the chinese still have them). Off the top of my head, we cover the D-21 in more depth in our SR-71 episdoe with Paul Crickmore who is The Guy on the subject.
Pima costs tooooo much. $ 40.00 just to walk through the front door. It used to be only a donation.
It is the way of things I'm afraid. The entry fee is comparable to IWM Duxford and elsewhere. I would recommend checking out our interview with Pima's CEO Scott Marchand to get a look at what goes on behind the scenes.
How do you ignore the F4 Phantom, a multiservice fighter bomber that served for decades?
While technically in the Century Series as F-110 it was redesignated and as such doesn't fit with the accepted convention. Lots of love for the F-4 on the channel, as the video with Eilen Bjorkman showed!
Worth viewing.
Don't give me an F one oh 4 with hardly any wings at all
It goes real fast,
but you'll die in blast,
Don't give me an F one oh 4, no!
Engine with cockpit and control fins.
Manned missle
The F-106 was a good dog fighter. Also, the first with super cruise.
I always wondered about the 102 and 106 as dogfighters. When I was young I lived on Elmendorf AFB where the resident interceptor squadron flew the 102A. At an airshow one year a local aviator named Red Dodge flew his P-51 in a mock dogfight against a 102 and it really didn't look good for the 102. Of course recips against jets and bullets against air to air missiles isn't really a dogfight but jet against jet looks more like a regional conflict compared to old school fighter battles.
Delta wings lose speed rapidly in manoeuvres, they are stall resistant but the vortices are draggy.
the F 106 is the most beautiful Plane ever made in my opinion
It does have lovely lines
F107 doesn't have intakes on sides because the intakes would interfere with the wing structure. A top intake doesn't cause these problems and doesn't vacuum objects off the runway. The scarry part for the pilot is ejection and being sucked in.
Didn't show much love for the F-101 Voodoo, 😢
We needed to trim one for time and the Voodoo took the hit. We will return to it in the future when we look at the CF-101! There is a lot of love out there for the 101.
Nice channel.
I’m pretty sure the F-110/F-4 Phantom II was turned into McNamara’s one fighter fits all, minus a gun. The F-111 was too heavy to land on an aircraft carrier which caused Grumman to create the F-14 Tomcat for fleet air superiority. This in turn leads to the Air Forces fighter mafia craving what became the F-15 and F-16…
The F-4 was already in the pipeline before McNamara, the F-111 was his dream aircraft.
The F-111 wasn't too heavy for carriers. It completed it's carrier trials without any problems. The Navy just used the weight issue as an excuse to cancel it.
We were holding short of the runway at Edwards waiting for takeoff and F-104's were doing touch and go landings. They would extend the gear on short final which I though was interesting not exactly sure why they were doing this? This was in 1966
Reducing speed I believe. Airliners do it going into Heathrow over Richmond as it means they can run less flap, which annoys the locals below.
@@damcasterspod The were putting the gear down at 200 feet something in my 62 years of flying airplanes is something that I have never seen before or since.
No F-107s ever crashed, and the engineering solution for ejection would have been a sliding rod or rods.
Davis-Monthan AFB nearby flying A-10
So there are a couple, not just one F-101 such a plane the VoodooII
No time for this beauty??
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder! ;)
We will return to the F-101 when we look at the RCAF post Arrow
Sounds great! Absolutely I'll keep an open eye for that txs great job!!