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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Dave Kearton twisted the electrons to say:
"Howard Berkowitz" wrote in message ... || | Unbidden, I have a flash thought of referring to the F-104 as the | dachshund of high-performance aircraft. ;-) Quite apt.....and fortunate that Kelly Johnson left off the genitalia. les barkerDachshunds with erections, can't climb stairs!/les barker -- These opinions might not even be mine ... Let alone connected with my employer ... |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Prowlus wrote:
Is this a genuine capability for a Starfighter? I would have thought it wouldn't have the loading capacity for such a weapon or even the software to launch it unlike the F-102 or F-106 Heheh. Software??? No - just lots of relays and some permission switches. If ever there were a "point-and-shoot" nuke, the unguided Genie rocket was it. After seeing the bomb loads the Euros would hang on an F-104, I can easily imagine TWO genies, one below each wing - but not on the centerline. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Peter Stickney wrote:
[The] F-4's radar and FCS couldn't, in its stock form, compute the launch and intercept points for the Genie, or perform the electrical octoflugerons needed to set the Genie's timers. "Octoflugerons"?! Okay, I'll bite: WTF is an octoflugeron when it's at home? -- Andrew Chaplin SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO (If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.) |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
Andrew Chaplin writes: Peter Stickney wrote: [The] F-4's radar and FCS couldn't, in its stock form, compute the launch and intercept points for the Genie, or perform the electrical octoflugerons needed to set the Genie's timers. "Octoflugerons"?! Okay, I'll bite: WTF is an octoflugeron when it's at home? The name my instructors drilled into me for an impressive, although unintended maneuver, such as, say, spinning over the top while trying to core a thermal (Not being too coordated, and stalling the upside wing (Left turn, right wing, for example. It's Natures Way of telling you to pay more attention. Or pulling too much over the top of a loop in a T-6 and snapping out of it. Wake turbulence can be good for premium Octoflugeron performance. In the case of the AIR-2, the timer for detonation was basically a specially tuned RLC (Resistance, Inductance, Capacitor) circuit. The Fire COntrol System of the launching airplane figured out how long the rocket would take to reach the target, and charge the capacitors to the appropriate value. If all the appropriate conditions were met, the warhead would detonate when the voltage dropped to a certain level. The FCS for a Genie equipped airplane had to be able to track the target, compute the proper pull-up point for the preferred snap-up attack - it could also attack co-altitude - and figure the launch point and flight time. With a flight time on the order of 5-10 seconds, a 2G maneuvering target like a bomber wasn't going to get out of the way, once the rocket fired. The interceptor would be breaking away and down, with the cockpit opposite the target. Since the Genie required no guidance, you didn't have to follow it in. (Very much Lanch and Leave) The AIM-26 (Nuclear Falcon, whic was an option for some F-102s in the early/mid-'60s) mist have been a real fun trip. The warhead was very small, with a kill radius of about 250 ft. (About the same as a big AAM like a Sparrow or Phoenix) One of the problems with the Falcon series was that they weren't able to work out a proximity fuze - the missile had to actually hit the target to detonate. (And they don't call them miss-iles for nothing) Making a proximity fuze that will work through the range of aspect angles and closing speeds that a missile has (As opposed to an AAA shell, which is always coming up from below at some huge speed, and, since its dirt cheap, tends to be fired in swarms) is a difficult task - you've got to integrate the closing speeds, miss distance, the speed that the warhead fragments will be travelling, the shape of the fragment cloud - and, for all I know, whether the missile techs had garlic for lunch, in order to have the fuze determine the right point to set things off. With a "fragment cloud" that travels at pretty much the speed of light, as with the radiation from a baby nuke, you don't have that problem. You do, however, have to keep teh nose pointed toward the target enough for the missile to see the radar reflection and guide. So, you've got to fly toward your nuclear blast, once you've pulled the trigger. Not fun at all - teh light from the fireball would still be enough to blind you, if the flash curtains aren't as good as they think they are. -- Pete Stickney A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many bad measures. -- Daniel Webster |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
"Dave Kearton" wrote in message ... "Steve Jahn" wrote in message ... | According to the book Warbird Tech F-104 | The Missile was fired about five times from the F-104. The airplane was also | ground tested while hanging from a crane. The test was a Skunk works | project. | Steve Well I sit corrected. Thanks Do you know whether it was fired from the centreline or a wing station? Center line, from a drop down trapeze. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
"Steve Jahn" wrote in message ... According to the book Warbird Tech F-104 The Missile was fired about five times from the F-104. The airplane was also ground tested while hanging from a crane. The test was a Skunk works project. Steve "John Keeney" wrote in message ... "Prowlus" wrote in message om... I was watching this programme called "flying through time" which this week was about the century series fighters from f-100 to f-106 and it mentioned that the f-104 toted the genie rocket as one of its weapon options . Now this programme usually gives info whilst givin the wrong imagery or both but it did show a zipper with a weird retractable centerline pylon supposedly for a big honking genie as so the programme is leadin the viewer to believe . Is this a genuine capability for a Starfighter? I would have thought it wouldn't have the loading capacity for such a weapon or even the software to launch it unlike the F-102 or F-106 That's what the trapeze was for but I don't believe it was bought. That's it! The tape I saw was of the F-104 suspended from a crane of some sort, with the trapeze and Genie operated that way. Thanks! Don H. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 17 Aug 2004 13:10:11 -0500, "Don Harstad"
wrote: "Steve Jahn" wrote in message ... According to the book Warbird Tech F-104 The Missile was fired about five times from the F-104. The airplane was also ground tested while hanging from a crane. The test was a Skunk works project. Steve "John Keeney" wrote in message ... "Prowlus" wrote in message om... I was watching this programme called "flying through time" which this week was about the century series fighters from f-100 to f-106 and it mentioned that the f-104 toted the genie rocket as one of its weapon options . Now this programme usually gives info whilst givin the wrong imagery or both but it did show a zipper with a weird retractable centerline pylon supposedly for a big honking genie as so the programme is leadin the viewer to believe . Is this a genuine capability for a Starfighter? I would have thought it wouldn't have the loading capacity for such a weapon or even the software to launch it unlike the F-102 or F-106 That's what the trapeze was for but I don't believe it was bought. That's it! The tape I saw was of the F-104 suspended from a crane of some sort, with the trapeze and Genie operated that way. Thanks! Don H. just because a plane dosent carry a certain load, dosent mean it cant. case in point, F-16A and the sparrow missle. they were shooting Aim-7's from the YF-16 prototype, and basically all F-16 before the ADV version for the ANG came into beging was able to use the sparrow with minor software modifacation. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
(Peter Stickney) wrote: "Octoflugerons"?! Okay, I'll bite: WTF is an octoflugeron when it's at home? The name my instructors drilled into me for an impressive, although unintended maneuver, such as, say, spinning over the top while trying to core a thermal (Not being too coordated, and stalling the upside wing (Left turn, right wing, for example. It's Natures Way of telling you to pay more attention. Ain't that the truth? The first time I ever went practicing accelerated stalls by myself, the Citabria evidently found me wanting at the rudder. It promptly slapped me in the head with about 120 degrees of roll, about 70 degrees of pitch, and maybe 150 degrees of yaw, all before I could catch a breath. It was exactly the way you said: over the top to the right side. I'll never forget that. I was quite fully attentive, very rapidly. Billy http://www.two--four.net/weblog.php |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
TRUE AMERICAN!! | Grantland | Military Aviation | 5 | May 28th 04 05:15 AM |
True He-176 Prototype Photo | robert arndt | Military Aviation | 15 | April 28th 04 09:59 PM |
Former head of cadet discipline says she never saw a 'true rape' | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | September 11th 03 08:37 PM |
How low can you go? (old but true) | Ron | Military Aviation | 1 | July 30th 03 05:56 AM |