MILAVIA Forum - Military Aviation Discussion Forum

Author Topic: F-111  (Read 18665 times)

Offline valkyrian

  • Fighter Ace
  • *****
  • Posts: 303
  • Country: gr
  • Goodbye my friend Tigershark, R.I.P.
F-111
« on: July 29, 2009, 11:28:47 AM »
It is always interesting to get to read real stories about fighters. Since we have the luck to have among us an "insider" (F-111 C/C are you around?) i start this thread on purpose.

I am sure that F-111 C/C has heard stories from pilots of how good or bad was the F-111. I would like to ask if an F-15 or F-14 could follow the 111 either on high altitude or in low level chase. Or, could the F-111 defend itself against other fighters?

F-111 C/C i am looking forward for your interesting reply.....

Offline F-111 C/C

  • Hero of Flight
  • ******
  • Posts: 634
  • Country: us
Re: F-111
« Reply #1 on: July 29, 2009, 07:20:29 PM »
F-111 guys have always had the pleasure of bragging about the -111's ONLY defensive capability....it's speed. It has the distiction of being the fastest Combat aircraft in the world at any altitude (it is generally accepted that the MiG-25's Mach 3.2 run is unconfirmed). I have personally flown at 900KIAS at 5000' AGL in the last FB-111A made serial# 69-6514. I have personally 'recovered' aircraft that have flown Mach 2.8 with no problems (other than the melted paint and charred decals) and have worked on F-111G 67-7194 that flew 3.1 during testing for the B-83 Thermo-nuclear bomb. -111 pilots used to love to brag how at Red Flag they would outrun F-15s 'on the deck' no problem. When you combine a huge fuel load, 50,000lbs of thrust, the aerodynamics of a dart and Automatic TFR, nothing has the speed, fuel or balls to chase an F-111!
« Last Edit: February 18, 2010, 04:19:43 PM by F-111 C/C »
Wars are won by carrying the 'heavy iron' downtown!

Offline F-111 C/C

  • Hero of Flight
  • ******
  • Posts: 634
  • Country: us
Re: F-111
« Reply #2 on: July 29, 2009, 10:04:47 PM »
Speed wasn't the only thing the F-111 had going for it. It had the distiction of being able to do it's job (deep Strike Interdiction) alone. It could accurately deliver weapons on target in any weather, at night without needing Foward air control, tanker support, Combat air patrol, or radar jamming and ECM. The plane carried a built-in ECM suite and RHAW system (radar homing and warning), without the need of an external pod, to alert them of threats. Most other jets have these systems attached externally and/or fly with other aircraft to perform these functions. The F-111s were always restricted to Sub-sonic range egress at Red Flag after the first couple of days because they were causing damage to the range equipment due to their low-level speed. One memorable excercise we had was an 'infiltration' excercise we flew 'against' the F-15s at Otis AFB, MA. The base is on the North East Coast of the U.S. and was a Fighter-Interceptor Squadron to intercept any enemy aircraft that would try to approach our airspace. 2 of our F-111s were told to fly out over the Atlantic and approach the base whereupon they would be detected, the F-15s would scramble and intercept the 'enemy' aircraft. According to our pilots, they not only flew into our airspace but flew right over the base undetected. They were told they were flying too low, too fast to be detected, and to go around and approach again only slower and higher!
Wars are won by carrying the 'heavy iron' downtown!

Offline SukhoiLover

  • Fighter Ace
  • *****
  • Posts: 269
  • Country: pt
Re: F-111
« Reply #3 on: July 29, 2009, 11:20:05 PM »
Theres also a fabulous story of how a jammer 111 scored a kill against a Mirage F-1 in the war against the iranians, are you familiar with it?
http://sukhoitribute.blogspot.com/

English version: http://sukhoitributeenglish.blogspot.com/


Pavel be proud of your legacy!!!!

Offline AVIATOR

  • Hero of Flight
  • ******
  • Posts: 821
  • Country: au
  • TALLY HO CHAPS
Re: F-111
« Reply #4 on: July 30, 2009, 12:21:47 AM »
Excuse me coming over the top of you Suck, but I'd like to ask a question too.
If the F-111 is as good as you say, Aard, why not just make new ones and incorporate stealth technology. Sure would save heaps of money.
With the RAAF we don't have those commercial pressures where different aircraft companies are competing for orders. The best will do.
« Last Edit: July 30, 2009, 12:28:04 AM by AVIATOR »

Offline F-111 C/C

  • Hero of Flight
  • ******
  • Posts: 634
  • Country: us
Re: F-111
« Reply #5 on: July 30, 2009, 12:22:13 AM »
Yeah, I posted it here back in January...here it is again:

An EF-111A Raven was credited with a "kill" during Desert Storm in the same manner. On the night of January 17, 1991, an Iraqi Mirage F.1 flew into the ground while chasing EF-111A serial number 66-0016. Even though the Raven is unarmed and has no air-to-air capability, the Raven crew was given credit for the kill.
« Last Edit: July 30, 2009, 01:11:04 PM by F-111 C/C »
Wars are won by carrying the 'heavy iron' downtown!

Offline F-111 C/C

  • Hero of Flight
  • ******
  • Posts: 634
  • Country: us
Re: F-111
« Reply #6 on: July 30, 2009, 12:34:48 AM »
Excuse me coming over the top of you Suck, but I'd like to ask a question too.
If the F-111 is as good as you say, Aard, why not just make new ones and incorporate stelth technology. Sure would save heaps of money.
With the RAAF we don't have those commercial pressures where different aircraft companies are competing for orders. The best will do.

Well the decision to not keep the -111s in service was mostly political, not due to their capability (The F-111s had the highest bombing successes during the Gulf war by a huge margin out of all our aircraft including the F-117A). They had all just received a Billion dollar Avionics Modernization which included all digital flight control computers and Dual Ring-laser gyro navigation and GPS as well as state of the art targeting/bombing equipment. I think everybody's biggest fear was the age of the airframe. -111s were built from '66 thru '76 (the last F-models were '74 models completed in '76) and even the newest airframes were approaching 6000 hours. In the end though, companies to not make as much money and Politicians do not get re-elected by keeping old planes around, sad to say. Dr. Carlo Kopp proved that it made more sense for Australia to keep the F-111s than to spend the money for F-18Fs and eventually F-35s but that wasn't the 'popular' choice.
Wars are won by carrying the 'heavy iron' downtown!

Offline SukhoiLover

  • Fighter Ace
  • *****
  • Posts: 269
  • Country: pt
Re: F-111
« Reply #7 on: July 30, 2009, 12:45:37 AM »
Excuse me coming over the top of you Suck, but I'd like to ask a question too.
If the F-111 is as good as you say, Aard, why not just make new ones and incorporate stelth technology. Sure would save heaps of money.
With the RAAF we don't have those commercial pressures where different aircraft companies are competing for orders. The best will do.

Well the decision to not keep the -111s in service was mostly political, not due to their capability (The F-111s had the highest bombing successes during the Gulf war by a huge margin out of all our aircraft including the F-117A). They had all just received a Billion dollar Avionics Modernization which included all digital flight control computers and Dual Ring-laser gyro navigation and GPS as well as state of the art targeting/bombing equipment. I think everybody's biggest fear was the age of the airframe. -111s were built from '66 thru '76 (the last F-models were '74 models completed in '76) and even the newest airframes were approaching 6000 hours. In the end though, companies to not make as much money and Politicians do not get re-elected by keeping old planes around, sad to say. Dr. Carlo Kopp proved that it made more sense for Australia to keep the F-111s than to spend the money for F-18Fs and eventually F-35s but that wasn't the 'popular' choice.

More on that matter: http://www.ausairpower.net/pig.html#mozTocId205192
http://sukhoitribute.blogspot.com/

English version: http://sukhoitributeenglish.blogspot.com/


Pavel be proud of your legacy!!!!

Offline valkyrian

  • Fighter Ace
  • *****
  • Posts: 303
  • Country: gr
  • Goodbye my friend Tigershark, R.I.P.
Re: F-111
« Reply #8 on: July 30, 2009, 09:39:24 AM »
Wow, i see that our friend F-111 C/C "hit the afterburners".......thank you for sharing these stories with us...

I don't know what to ask first. F-111 C/C you said so many so interesting things....I guess that speed issue...2.8 to 3.1 Mach, it really amazes me, becauze even a Mig-25 will wreck its engines if it has to fly at 3.1. And the combination of TF30/inlets wasn't the best (surge problems). Why we never heard this before? I mean such a speed for sure makes a great speed record...


Offline valkyrian

  • Fighter Ace
  • *****
  • Posts: 303
  • Country: gr
  • Goodbye my friend Tigershark, R.I.P.
Re: F-111
« Reply #9 on: July 30, 2009, 10:00:17 AM »
........and i forgot, the age issue..The B-52's are far more older, many countries operate F-4 Phantoms, so i guess the age wasn't really an issue...

Offline F-111 C/C

  • Hero of Flight
  • ******
  • Posts: 634
  • Country: us
Re: F-111
« Reply #10 on: July 30, 2009, 01:26:01 PM »
Wow, i see that our friend F-111 C/C "hit the afterburners".......thank you for sharing these stories with us...

I don't know what to ask first. F-111 C/C you said so many so interesting things....I guess that speed issue...2.8 to 3.1 Mach, it really amazes me, becauze even a Mig-25 will wreck its engines if it has to fly at 3.1. And the combination of TF30/inlets wasn't the best (surge problems). Why we never heard this before? I mean such a speed for sure makes a great speed record...



The original intake design on the 'A' and 'C' models utilized a Triple Plow I with splitter plate and translating cowl design. This initially was to blame for the compressor stall problems you are referring to. All the rest of the models utilized the Triple-plow II design which moved the inlets away from the fuselage 4 more inches, deleted the splitter plates and used 3 'blow-in' doors instead of the translating cowl. This rectified the early intake stall problems and, with a well designed inlet spike system, allowed for very high Mach numbers. Anyone from the F-111 community with attest to Mach 2.6-2.8 with regularity.
Wars are won by carrying the 'heavy iron' downtown!

Offline Webmaster

  • MILAVIA Webmaster
  • Administrator
  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 2842
  • Country: nl
Re: F-111
« Reply #11 on: August 05, 2009, 04:51:51 PM »
Thanks F-111 C/C, very interesting posts. Keep posting them please. Can you share anything on the maintenance hours per flight hour? I think it was about 40hrs per flight hour on the F-14 Tomcat before it retired, I would think the F-111 required just as much attention in its final days.
  • Interests: Su-15, Su-27, Tu-22, Tornado, RNLAF
Niels Hillebrand
MILAVIA Webmaster

 



AVIATION TOP 100 - www.avitop.com click to vote for MILAVIA