We were doing a four plane KC-130 refueling mission off the east coast MCAS Beaufort. 1982-3 timeframe. So we’re refueling Phantoms and I was in the right seat and I think we were dash 2 and all of a sudden up come a pair of F-106s in the vertical between us and dash 3. They never saw us, but fighter guys have generally poor scans…😊

@RedFail1-1

Ай бұрын

Oh they saw you. Gotta keep it hush hush though so what gets you less trouble, saying you saw them and did something dangerous to show off? Or say you didn't see them and it was an honest mistake?

I worked on the F-106 MA-1 weapons control system (Radar, IR, flight control, weapons release) the missle bay doors and rails are opening and closing way too fast. That needs to be changed. Also the radar scope didn't look like that. There is so much that is not right with the cockpit and systems. The Genie Air 2 was a altitude select missile, point and select the altitude you want the nuke to detonated. We were taught the nuke is like a fly swatter. Point for middle of flight of bombers and the nuke will take them out.

Nice. The 27th tail flash from the 27th FIS, Loring AFB. I worked on this aircraft from 66 thru 69! Thanks.

Awesome video! Just a month ago I took my father to the National AF museum at Wright Patterson in order to see one of the F-106s he worked on as a flight line engine mechanic. It's a beautiful plane, but as you mentioned, the view from inside the cockpit is abysmal. The 2 piece canopy is terrible, but the real issue is the radar scope at eye level blocking any forward vision. Maybe the designers figured that a pilot didn't need to actually see a giant russian bomber especially when directed by the SAGE system

Looks pretty good--especially for free!

Awesome video! The Six is an awsome aircraft. Will be trying it out too

Spino's Simulations, This is great! I liked it and subscribed!

Imma send my friend a polite little "gift" with this one

My dads cousin, whatever that is to me, actually invented one of the first of some type of laser guided missiles. Also worked on the Star Wars program.

@JenkemSuperfan

Ай бұрын

Your 2nd cousin

Nice summary and video. Really enjoyed it. And I think you nailed the "use-case" of the 106. Get up there and launch some Genies at the bomber formation and get yourself to safety quickly. The Falcons really were...not very good at all. I heard in a podcast, that the F-101B Voodoo Pilots would have traded the Falcons for those 3x20mm cannons (the F-101C had) every day of the week ;-)

Aim 4 seems to have been an early phoenix like weapon, which makes more sense given that the targets for the aircraft were bombers. It's not really fair to compare the aim-4 to anything other than maybe an aim 9B which was rear quarter only. the aim 4 is semi active or rear quarter heat seeking, but your issues probably are related to the weapons being in the former mode rather than the latter. But really, the 9 wasn't much much better except against very stable targets.

@SpinosSimulations

18 күн бұрын

Actually it was, the AIM-9 had much faster cooling times for the seeker, so a lock could be achieved much faster than with an AIM-4. Against maneuvering targets, this was a big advantage. The AIM-9 also had a proximity fuse, the AIM-4 did not. For bomber interception the AIM-4 was better due to its better seeker, but for dogfighting the AIM-9 was better.

My Dad flew the “6” in the 70s. They had already removed the top canopy rail then. It was a great platform just a lousy suite of missiles. Unfortunate.

@SpinosSimulations

28 күн бұрын

Also really sad that the missile problem could have been rectified if only they had wired the wing pylons for Sidewinders. Course that would have added drag, but four Sidewinders would probably have been worth it. You could only fit two of them in the bay, and that only with a significant launcher re-work and probably removal of the gun. But a gun and four Sidewinders would be a pretty nice loadout for the Six.

Only having one aircraft ready to intercept is a thing that happens. Watched an interview with an F-15C Pilot and she mentioned having to go up alone. Her lead had a problem that took a while to solve before he could get in the air to join her.

C'mon, stop putting lead pursuit in on the MiG. You keep turning inside his circle, which gets you closer and closer, and maintains high aspect. Get into lag, unload the angles, THEN pull the nose onto him when the angle decreases.

Do you have a download link to this? Edit: It’s in the description, it’s a discord link to the VSN discord, which is why I missed it the first time

@RedFail1-1

Ай бұрын

Descriptions are a thing. Start reading them.

@sam8742

Ай бұрын

@@RedFail1-1 I guess I missed it, but do you really have to be such an arse?

@bjmccann1

Ай бұрын

​@@sam8742They either think that they're clever or funny. They're neither.

Its a modified F-15 EFM FM.. at most it's a close approximation, not an accurate FM

Like an early f22

@sam8742

Ай бұрын

Just no, no not at all

@RedFail1-1

Ай бұрын

lmao wut

1

That cockpit is horrible as far as visibility os concerned lol. I wonder who's idea was to have a bar above the pilots head and in front of their field of view... Seems very odd as a design decision, or perhaps structural integrity needed it?

@applecore4720

Ай бұрын

binocular vision (your two eyes) will maybe the bar infront less noticeable, though you still have to adjust your head to look up, VR gets this across better.

@subjectc7505

Ай бұрын

That's been a design during the time, it's probably for structural integrity and aerodynamics.

@aztec0112

Ай бұрын

The "bar" in the middle was actually a glare shield to reduce reflections and such caused by the slab windows on the windscreen

@control_the_pet_population

Ай бұрын

To be fair to the designers, visibility wasn't really a concern. The 106 had to go fast and climb quickly, not dogfight. When your only potential mission is radar guided bomber intercept, you don't exactly need the 360 bubble canopy.

More like DeltaSHART

THE USAF/Hughs AIM-4 was a truly awful missile system, utterly inferior to the USN AIM-9 in every way. It had very narrow launch parameters, a ridiculously complex seeker cooling system that, once activated, took too long to cool down and lasted only two minutes before rendering the missile as a paperweight. It had no proximity fusing, only contact fuses in the tail fins. IRL it scored only five hits with 54 launches in the SEA. The ONLY reason it lasted as long as it did, was because it was the only missile the F-106 could carry, the Sidewinder being way too long

@control_the_pet_population

Ай бұрын

To be fair to the designers, the AIM-4 was designed to kill slow moving and predictable bombers... it was never meant to be a whizbang dogfight missile to shoot down MiGs. It sucked in Vietnam because they were using it against targets it was never meant to defeat.