F-106 Speed record questions....

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

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

I have heard rumors of ever faster on FCF, pushing 2.85....

Definitely had the power to do it, at least in the F model, and probably the D
and E too, if they were clean, no racks..


Ron
Tanker 65, C-54E (DC-4)

"Ron" wrote in message
...


Definitely had the power to do it, at least in the F model, and probably
the D
and E too, if they were clean, no racks..

Pretty funny.

(WaltBJ) wrote:
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.

I read a diary of a flight (Airpower ?) that said the F-111
had a timer that assisted with avoiding over-temperature on the
canopy, did older aircraft like the F-106 have anything similar, or
was it all seat-of-the-pants ?



----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

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

"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.

Limiting factor for the Six was the EGT. In the left(?) MWW it had what
was called a "635 clock" that tracked both the consecutive and
cumulative number of seconds that the engine operated above 635 degrees
F in EGT. Don't remember the T.O. limits anymore, but if either counter
read too high, then the engine was pulled and sent into the shop for
teardown and inspection.

The F-111 (I can only speak for the E's) had a Total Temperature gauge
in the upper left quadrant of the pilot's front instrument panel. It
measured the temperature of the windscreen and counted down the number
of seconds (Sec To Go) before it would lose structural integrity. The
face of the gauge had two tick marks on it: the first one started the
clock; the second one basically said "Too late, Charley - I'm melting
right now." I don't recall the actual temperature limits, but they
weren't anywhere near as high as the legends suggest. IIRC the first
tick mark was around 200 degrees F and the second around 240. I think
that the total time allowed at the lower limit was on the order of five
minutes - much less as the upper limit was approached.

I've got an old GD engineering drawing in a box around here somewhere
that shows the instrument panels in 1/4 scale with all of the gauge face
marks on them. If I can find the thing, I'll update this post. In one of
the flights that I took we hit 2.01M at 43k ft and the windscreen felt
warm enough on my bare hand to get a cup of coffee to a drinkable
temperature.

Vygg

John S. Shinal wrote:

(WaltBJ) wrote:

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.


I read a diary of a flight (Airpower ?) that said the F-111
had a timer that assisted with avoiding over-temperature on the
canopy, did older aircraft like the F-106 have anything similar, or
was it all seat-of-the-pants ?



----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"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

"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.

"Vygg" wrote

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?"

FYI, the classical formulation is "Who are you going to believe? Me or your
own lying eyes."

"ian maclure" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 01:14:19 +0000, Pete wrote:


"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?

Is that "aerodynamically limited" as in "It don't matter
how much coal y'all pour on she ain't gonna go no faster"
a la F-102, "aerodynamically limited" as in "goink faster
and parts fallink off" a la Mig 25, or "aerodynamically
limited" as in "we go anya faster ana the leadinga edges she's a
gonna melt" a la F-104 ( not including the S version ) ( well
technically it was thermally induced creep that was the problem ).

I saw an F-106 at Plattsburgh in the mid 80's. The pilot was
older than dirt and for some reason I'd always thought the 106
was a bigger airplane. Must have been one of the last in service.

I was delivering 777s at Paine Field near where the B-52 was parked in 97
and I had always though it was a bigger airplane.