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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
F-102's easy to fly ( Lars Larson Trying to Help OR NG home for 2 weeks of leave.
"Bill Shatzer" wrote in message ... On 7 Mar 2004, Hal Lillywhite wrote: Bill Shatzer wrote in message ... from a book I just happen to have handy: The Delta Dagger was the first interceptor to be delivered as a complete weapons system - the weapons, the electronic equipment, and the plane itself functioned as a unit. The F-102 could be flown remotely through its Remote Control Flight System (RCFS). All the pilot had to do was take off and land the plane; the technical experts on the ground took care of the rest. During emergencies and under certain operational circumstances, the pilot had overriding capabilities. Still confident, Hal? Yup. Your quotation says *nothing* about actually engaging the enemy under remote control. It's one thing to direct an aircraft remotely in normal flight, quite another to direct it in the combat environment where the target is evasive and well-armed, perhaps accompanied by well-armed escorts. I already admited that it could be *flown* remotely, the question is if it could effectively engage in combat under remote control. Well, with the SAGE system, the ground folks even pushed the button for missile launch. I think the F-102 was upgraded to the full SAGE system by the time the dubya was flying 'em but I can't find a definitive reference. Still, the SAGE was basically an RCFS system with a semi-automatic ground control element introduced - rather than ground controllers telling the aircraft where and how to fly, a computer took over most of those functions. But, in any case, what part of, "All the pilot had to do was take off and land the plane; the technical experts on the ground took care of the rest." is difficult to understand? Ground control flies the a/c to the intercept point. If the pilot has to push the button to arm the AIM-4, confirm that the lock-on light is lit (or, he gets "tone", however it worked with the AIM-4/F-102), and push the launch button or whether that is down automatically from the ground makes little difference in the level of pilot skill required. You're not likely to find manuevering bombers over texas. They lacked the fuel to do that. You're not going to find "well armed bombers" over texas - Soviet bombers carried 'bout the same armament as did US bombers of that era which is to say a tail gun and that's about it (and as the range of an AIM-4 was five to ten miles (depending on the model) and the range of aerial guns was less than half the smaller number, the amount of bomber armament was more or less irrelevent - which was why they didn't carry much. And you're definately not going to find enemy escort fighters over texas. But, this is an interesting diversion but it's pretty much exhausted my interest. You may have the last word iffen you want. But still, the dubya flying F-102s was No Big Deal. And attempts to turn him into some superman for so doing just miss the mark completely. No one is saying he's a superman, just that he had to have some sort of smarts to make it through and train on an aircraft that was anything but easy to fly. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 7 Mar 2004, Brian wrote: "Bill Shatzer" wrote in message -snips- But still, the dubya flying F-102s was No Big Deal. And attempts to turn him into some superman for so doing just miss the mark completely. No one is saying he's a superman, just that he had to have some sort of smarts to make it through and train on an aircraft that was anything but easy to fly. For extremely small values of "some sort of smarts". The amount of smarts required to pull down a "C+" average in college seems to have been entirely sufficient. It's really too bad that being president requires a few more smarts than flying an F-102. Or getting a "C+" college GPA. Peace and justice, |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"Bill Shatzer" wrote in message ... On Sun, 7 Mar 2004, Brian wrote: "Bill Shatzer" wrote in message -snips- But still, the dubya flying F-102s was No Big Deal. And attempts to turn him into some superman for so doing just miss the mark completely. No one is saying he's a superman, just that he had to have some sort of smarts to make it through and train on an aircraft that was anything but easy to fly. For extremely small values of "some sort of smarts". The amount of smarts required to pull down a "C+" average in college seems to have been entirely sufficient. It's really too bad that being president requires a few more smarts than flying an F-102. Or getting a "C+" college GPA. The Harvard MBA covers that. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
The F102A was not a "full automatic flying system" like the later F106
was. I graduated from the F102a Interceptor Weapons School at Tyndall AFB and was weapons training officer in 2 F102 squadrons - 326 and 332 FISs. I was also an F102 maintenance test pilot. As for being easy to fly as an airplane - yes, with a caveat. That was: don't get into a slow speed descent near the ground, as in a dragged-in final. A few pilots ended up wiping out the gear because they initially pulled back on the stick to 'stretch the glide' a bit and all that did was raise the nose, increase the AOA, send induced drag (and sink rate)skyhigh and by the time they realized what was happening even full afterburner wasn't enough thrust to break their rate of descent. Splat! And the Deuce's notoriously weak gear wouldn't take much of a jolt. 540 FPM was the red-line sink rate. The SAGE system was not coupled to the Deuce's autopilot. The pilot followed a SAGE steering dot on the radar scope and a target marker circle indicated where the SAGE computer thought the target was. Sometimes it was in there, sometimes not. Two small dials on the left side of the instrument pane communicated SAGE-commanded fighter Mach and target altitude. Granted, the MG10 fire control system computer normally delivered the fire signal for missiles and rockets but the pilot had to hold the trigger depressed waiting for the computer to make up its mind. The autopilot had an attack mode wherein it steered the aircraft according to the fire control system's commands in both missile and rocket mode - I do not know of anyone who ever used it. There are several good reasons why not - tactical requirements for missile attack being one, safety during a rocket pass being the other. The FCS/autpilot couldn't care less about target crossing angle - and the closer you were to a head-on or up the kilt attack the less the miss distance, finally degrading to about 16 feet - in the vertical plane. Most likely that would not be not survivable. Attitude, altitude and heading hold modes were handy especially when having to replan the flight. Approach mode was there but most pilots including me preferred to hand-fly the ILS. I once and once only employed the automatic approach when not required by the test sheets. Upon detecting the glide path the autopilot pitched up about 30 degrees nose-high for it, not a nice thing when the gear is already down and the airspeed is a sedate 150 knots. Now, there were some facets of the Deuce's employment guaranteed to raise the pulse level. An ID pass in the weather, especially at night; any low altitude intercept at night, especially over the ocean, below 1000 feet clearance height. Calls for split attention to work the radar and simultaneously fly precision instruments at speed and lastly avoid ramming the bogey. Not everybody was successful. Walt BJ |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"Bill Shatzer" wrote in message
... On Sun, 7 Mar 2004, Brian wrote: "Bill Shatzer" wrote in message -snips- But still, the dubya flying F-102s was No Big Deal. And attempts to turn him into some superman for so doing just miss the mark completely. No one is saying he's a superman, just that he had to have some sort of smarts to make it through and train on an aircraft that was anything but easy to fly. For extremely small values of "some sort of smarts". The amount of smarts required to pull down a "C+" average in college seems to have been entirely sufficient. It's really too bad that being president requires a few more smarts than flying an F-102. Or getting a "C+" college GPA. The mathematics knowledge needed to be a pilot is considerable. As is the individual decisiveness and confidence. This is true in any type of aircraft, but particularly in a Mach 1+ capable fighter jet. Especially as there have been words put out that the F-102 was dangerous to fly near the end of its service. Hardly the type of individual I would call a doofus. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"David E. Powell" wrote in message s.com... "Bill Shatzer" wrote in message ... On Sun, 7 Mar 2004, Brian wrote: "Bill Shatzer" wrote in message -snips- But still, the dubya flying F-102s was No Big Deal. And attempts to turn him into some superman for so doing just miss the mark completely. No one is saying he's a superman, just that he had to have some sort of smarts to make it through and train on an aircraft that was anything but easy to fly. For extremely small values of "some sort of smarts". The amount of smarts required to pull down a "C+" average in college seems to have been entirely sufficient. It's really too bad that being president requires a few more smarts than flying an F-102. Or getting a "C+" college GPA. The mathematics knowledge needed to be a pilot is considerable. As is the individual decisiveness and confidence. This is true in any type of aircraft, but particularly in a Mach 1+ capable fighter jet. Especially as there have been words put out that the F-102 was dangerous to fly near the end of its service. Hardly the type of individual I would call a doofus. Why don't you just refer this clown to WaltBJ's earlier post from today detailing the F-102 flight requirements (including a rather neat obliteration of the poster's claim that SAGE did it all for the pilot of the Deuce)? Heck, Walt actually *flew* them (among other aircraft). I'd do it myself but I killfiled the poster after reading his previous drivel. Brooks |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
... "David E. Powell" wrote in message s.com... "Bill Shatzer" wrote in message ... On Sun, 7 Mar 2004, Brian wrote: "Bill Shatzer" wrote in message -snips- But still, the dubya flying F-102s was No Big Deal. And attempts to turn him into some superman for so doing just miss the mark completely. No one is saying he's a superman, just that he had to have some sort of smarts to make it through and train on an aircraft that was anything but easy to fly. For extremely small values of "some sort of smarts". The amount of smarts required to pull down a "C+" average in college seems to have been entirely sufficient. It's really too bad that being president requires a few more smarts than flying an F-102. Or getting a "C+" college GPA. The mathematics knowledge needed to be a pilot is considerable. As is the individual decisiveness and confidence. This is true in any type of aircraft, but particularly in a Mach 1+ capable fighter jet. Especially as there have been words put out that the F-102 was dangerous to fly near the end of its service. Hardly the type of individual I would call a doofus. Why don't you just refer this clown to WaltBJ's earlier post from today detailing the F-102 flight requirements (including a rather neat obliteration of the poster's claim that SAGE did it all for the pilot of the Deuce)? Heck, Walt actually *flew* them (among other aircraft). I'd do it myself but I killfiled the poster after reading his previous drivel. Well said, and a good idea. Brooks |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Hi Walt
I could tell you a few stories about the weak nose gear involving Deuces of the 59th FIS up at Goose (64 to 67). There was one Deuce that came back from a practice scramble on a sunny Saturday afternoon in 1965 or 1966. The pilot was motoring at a fair clip along the taxiway parallel to Runway 19 (the runway he landed on) which happened to be on the R.C.A.F. side, when the nose wheel collapsed. The aircraft skidded almost 90 degrees to the right and came to rest 50 feet from where one of the messes was having a family day BBQ. I think a couple of sprinting records were broken that day. (-: Cheers...Chris |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Just a note - (Walt already knows this, I'm sure...)
WaltBJ wrote: [ snippage ] Granted, the MG10 fire control system computer normally delivered the fire signal for missiles and rockets but the pilot had to hold the trigger depressed waiting for the computer to make up its mind. ALL fighter aircraft worked this way (for missiles, though not for rockets in later machines). However, by the F-4, the presence of an Interlock IN/OUT switch routinely defeated the capability of the WCS/FCS to ensure the missile was fired inside its high kill-probability envelope. The autopilot had an attack mode wherein it steered the aircraft according to the fire control system's commands in both missile and rocket mode - I do not know of anyone who ever used it. There are several good reasons why not - tactical requirements for missile attack being one, safety during a rocket pass being the other. Old heads in WCS shops (former 102 & 106 guys) provided another reason: "hot dots" (a jerky Aim Dot, usually called by sticky resolvers or poorly aligned amplifiers in the antenna or computer) - which could bounce a pilot's head off the cockpit hardware if it were commanding the autopilot... - John T |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
"Dweezil Dwarftosser" wrote in message ... ALL fighter aircraft worked this way (for missiles, though not for rockets in later machines). Not sure what you mean here. Interceptor rocket attacks had the firing signal coming from the weapons computer when in the "full up" mode...but the AIM-9 was hot once the Master Arm was armed. Press the pickle button and that puppy was gone, tone or no tone, lock or no lock. In the 104, we used the trigger to fire the heaters. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Lars Larson Trying to Help OR NG home for 2 weeks of leave. | Brian | Military Aviation | 0 | March 8th 04 12:55 AM |