A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

F-106 Speed record questions....



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 18th 04, 10:24 PM
Vygg
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Hmmm. According to the USAF aircraft database, F-106A 56-0467 was last
assigned to the 329th FIS at George AFB, Ca and was destroyed in a class
A accident on 14 August 1961. The aircraft on display at USAFA is
58-0761. 0467 seems to have flown in squadron service for quite awhile
after making its speed run - not bad for an aircraft that's rumored to
have had its structure damaged.

As far as F-111's go . . . in my years with them I heard all sorts of
stories from the aircrews about amazing feats they'd accomplished in the
aircraft - the stories got better after a few pints in Jandy's Pub. Had
one guy in the 55th swore up and down that he'd flown TFR Manual
inverted - pretty good considering that the LARAs would be pointing the
wrong direction to tell him where the ground was - not to mention the
TFR antennas. He became highly irate when I called him on it.

Then there was the pair of Vark jocks that went into an apoplectic fit
of cursing at me when I asked where their drop tanks were after a
sortie. Blown ejector carts in the pylons, broken funny film on the tank
jettison button, and aircraft forms entries notwithstanding, they
claimed that they didn't have tanks loaded when they took off and
refused to budge on their story. One of those "What are you going to
believe? Your eyes or what I'm telling you?"

Vygg


WaltBJ wrote:
That F106 was on display at the USAFA - the heat exposure am=nnealed
the aluminum structure so it no longer possessed design strength and
had to be grounded. I also heard the engine's RPM was cranked up way
over tech order limits - interesting because a 1% increase on a dual
spool engine can be a 5% increase in thrust. Supposedly went from 93%
up to 97%.
I also had a long phone conversation with an old squadron mate. He
mentioned he used to FCF F111s - and had one out to 2.7 in a shallow
dive from 50 grand. And I believe him - know him well. Don't bother
telling me it's past the red line; that's just a mark on a gauge.
Walt BJ


  #2  
Old February 18th 04, 10:57 PM
Tarver Engineering
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Vygg" wrote in message
...
Hmmm. According to the USAF aircraft database, F-106A 56-0467 was last
assigned to the 329th FIS at George AFB, Ca and was destroyed in a class
A accident on 14 August 1961. The aircraft on display at USAFA is
58-0761. 0467 seems to have flown in squadron service for quite awhile
after making its speed run - not bad for an aircraft that's rumored to
have had its structure damaged.


Mach 2.3 was normal operating speed in the squadron I worked for. Our
people believed the F-106 was aerodynamicly limited to that speed.


  #3  
Old February 19th 04, 01:14 AM
Pete
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Tarver Engineering" wrote


Mach 2.3 was normal operating speed in the squadron I worked for. Our
people believed the F-106 was aerodynamicly limited to that speed.


"normal operating speed"
Where was the normal AO?

Pete


  #4  
Old February 19th 04, 01:17 AM
Tarver Engineering
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Pete" wrote in message
...

"Tarver Engineering" wrote


Mach 2.3 was normal operating speed in the squadron I worked for. Our
people believed the F-106 was aerodynamicly limited to that speed.


"normal operating speed"
Where was the normal AO?


Going mach 2.3 in an F-106 does not harm the airplane.

Going much faster than mach 2.3 is not an option in an intact F-106.


  #5  
Old February 19th 04, 03:04 AM
Pete
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"Pete" wrote in message
...

"Tarver Engineering" wrote


Mach 2.3 was normal operating speed in the squadron I worked for. Our
people believed the F-106 was aerodynamicly limited to that speed.


"normal operating speed"
Where was the normal AO?


Going mach 2.3 in an F-106 does not harm the airplane.

Going much faster than mach 2.3 is not an option in an intact F-106.


I don't question the -106 speed, but rather where they were doing it as part
of "normal operations"

Pete


  #6  
Old February 19th 04, 07:08 AM
Kevin Brooks
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Pete" wrote in message
...

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"Pete" wrote in message
...

"Tarver Engineering" wrote


Mach 2.3 was normal operating speed in the squadron I worked for.

Our
people believed the F-106 was aerodynamicly limited to that speed.

"normal operating speed"
Where was the normal AO?


Going mach 2.3 in an F-106 does not harm the airplane.

Going much faster than mach 2.3 is not an option in an intact F-106.


I don't question the -106 speed, but rather where they were doing it as

part
of "normal operations"


Question anything the Tarvernaut spouts. While some sources indicate a max
speed at altitude for the F-106 as being M2.3, the 319th FIS association's
website indicates it was actually a little bit below that (M2.25). And that
is the *max* speed--so his assertion that the F-106 normally operated at its
absolute max is crap. Now is about the time the Tarvernaut comes forth with
his, "Our F-106's were actually tasked to perform nuclear strike missions
with "optical nukes", and carried the AIM-7 Sparrow...", etc. All of which
is complete and utter hogwash, of course. But I suspect you may already know
this, and are just engaged in a bit of tail-twisting-of-the-Tarvernaut
here...

Brooks


Pete




  #7  
Old February 20th 04, 02:18 AM
David E. Powell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

ISTR Atlantic City-based 106s doing a lot of flying over the ocean, where
going to Mach 1+ was a normal occurence. Not sure if they passed 2 very
often, but it is possible. A lot of their flying was escorting Tu-95s and
other planes up the coast, which they often did in relays with other
National Guard squadrons.

Dave


  #8  
Old February 19th 04, 03:26 PM
Tarver Engineering
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Pete" wrote in message
...

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"Pete" wrote in message
...

"Tarver Engineering" wrote


Mach 2.3 was normal operating speed in the squadron I worked for.

Our
people believed the F-106 was aerodynamicly limited to that speed.

"normal operating speed"
Where was the normal AO?


Going mach 2.3 in an F-106 does not harm the airplane.

Going much faster than mach 2.3 is not an option in an intact F-106.


I don't question the -106 speed, but rather where they were doing it as

part
of "normal operations"


Our F-106s flew to Santa Barbara, air refueled, flew to 55,000 feet and then
headed for the Bearing Straight to meet their Soviet counterparts. Nose
down from 55,000 feet can make a lot of speed.


  #9  
Old February 19th 04, 03:54 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Tarver Engineering" wrote:


Our F-106s flew to Santa Barbara, air refueled, flew to 55,000 feet and then
headed for the Bearing Straight to meet their Soviet counterparts. Nose
down from 55,000 feet can make a lot of speed.


Christ John!...it's Bering Strait...you sound so careless, aren't
you concerned with what people think of you?
--

-Gord.
  #10  
Old February 20th 04, 12:28 AM
Vygg
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Tarver Engineering wrote:
"Vygg" wrote in message
...

Hmmm. According to the USAF aircraft database, F-106A 56-0467 was last
assigned to the 329th FIS at George AFB, Ca and was destroyed in a class
A accident on 14 August 1961. The aircraft on display at USAFA is
58-0761. 0467 seems to have flown in squadron service for quite awhile
after making its speed run - not bad for an aircraft that's rumored to
have had its structure damaged.



Mach 2.3 was normal operating speed in the squadron I worked for. Our
people believed the F-106 was aerodynamicly limited to that speed.


Tarver, you are brown-eyed. If you really were in the 194th you'll know
exactly what that means.

Vygg

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 0 October 1st 04 02:31 PM
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 0 May 1st 04 07:29 PM
bush rules! Be Kind Military Aviation 53 February 14th 04 04:26 PM
Edwards air show B-1 speed record attempt Paul Hirose Military Aviation 146 November 3rd 03 05:18 PM
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 0 October 2nd 03 03:07 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:39 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.