MILAVIA Forum - Military Aviation Discussion Forum

Author Topic: Convair F-106 vs Mc Donnel Douglas F-4B Phantom  (Read 27092 times)

Offline valkyrian

  • Fighter Ace
  • *****
  • Posts: 303
  • Country: gr
  • Goodbye my friend Tigershark, R.I.P.
Re: Convair F-106 vs Mc Donnel Douglas F-4B Phantom
« Reply #12 on: August 23, 2007, 09:45:28 AM »
Yes, Turkey and Greece, both operated the -102.

Offline Icarus

  • Pilot
  • **
  • Posts: 16
  • Country: gr
  • Planes on ships fan
Re: Convair F-106 vs Mc Donnel Douglas F-4B Phantom
« Reply #13 on: August 23, 2007, 02:29:28 PM »
Very true, my mistake ! I got confused by the similarity of the names ("Delta Dagger" vs. Delta Dart"). I still think it should be called simply "Six" ;D Thanks for the correction 8)

Offline Raptor

  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 1388
  • Country: sg
  • What's the next big thing?
Re: Convair F-106 vs Mc Donnel Douglas F-4B Phantom
« Reply #14 on: September 22, 2007, 02:36:39 PM »
Hahaha. You operated the '102 instead of the '106?  :o

I don't really care for the '6, but the two is atrocious.
-JCLim

Offline BigsWick

  • Pilot
  • **
  • Posts: 27
  • Country: us
Re: Convair F-106 vs Mc Donnel Douglas F-4B Phantom
« Reply #15 on: October 06, 2007, 12:16:07 AM »
I've always thought the 106 was an absolutely beautiful plane. It would have been interesting to see what it could have done had it been flown in combat like other century series fighters.

Offline valkyrian

  • Fighter Ace
  • *****
  • Posts: 303
  • Country: gr
  • Goodbye my friend Tigershark, R.I.P.
Re: Convair F-106 vs Mc Donnel Douglas F-4B Phantom
« Reply #16 on: October 08, 2007, 02:19:38 PM »
I imagine the -6 in Vietnam, where it could probably turn better than the unslatted F-4 B/C/D/J and therefore outturn the Mig-21.

It also had a gun, so it would fire with better accuracy than the podded SUU-20. Not to mention it was fast (that huge J75 rocks) and if the F-105 was faster on dry thrust than the F-4, then the -6 would have been even faster.
On the other side, it was big enough a nice visual target, with internal weapon carriage (lower rcs) but i bet no cheap Mig-15/17/19 could catch it and therefore dogfight with it, even the Mig-21 would probably run out of fuel if it was ever trying to catch the Dart....

What a great plane.........

Offline Globetrotter

  • Hero of Flight
  • ******
  • Posts: 838
  • Country: ar
  • I'm Thomas (now Globetrotter)
Re: Convair F-106 vs Mc Donnel Douglas F-4B Phantom
« Reply #17 on: October 08, 2007, 11:13:39 PM »
Quote
What a great plane.........

that resumes it all.
"Ad Astra Per Aspera"   (5º Grupo de Caza ≈ A-4AR Fightinghawk)

 ~ MALVINAS ARGENTINAS ~


Offline Webmaster

  • MILAVIA Webmaster
  • Administrator
  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 2842
  • Country: nl
Re: Convair F-106 vs Mc Donnel Douglas F-4B Phantom
« Reply #18 on: October 10, 2007, 12:49:57 AM »
I imagine the -6 in Vietnam, where it could probably turn better than the unslatted F-4 B/C/D/J and therefore outturn the Mig-21.

It also had a gun, so it would fire with better accuracy than the podded SUU-20. Not to mention it was fast (that huge J75 rocks) and if the F-105 was faster on dry thrust than the F-4, then the -6 would have been even faster.
On the other side, it was big enough a nice visual target, with internal weapon carriage (lower rcs) but i bet no cheap Mig-15/17/19 could catch it and therefore dogfight with it, even the Mig-21 would probably run out of fuel if it was ever trying to catch the Dart....

What a great plane.........

Actually, I don't think it would have done that much better. Okay, it had the gun, but not the training. It would still have been lured into the MiG trap. F-106 is an interceptor remember, this has huge impact on the way it is used. It would have been at too close a range to use its missiles. AIM-9B was crap, whether on a F-106 or F-4. At least the F-4 had two sets of eyes in the cockpit. The F-4 could and did also outrun the MiGs. And with no huge bomb loads on the F-106 or rocket pods, you would also need more bombers. So I don't know if it would have made a difference.
  • Interests: Su-15, Su-27, Tu-22, Tornado, RNLAF
Niels Hillebrand
MILAVIA Webmaster

Offline Raptor

  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 1388
  • Country: sg
  • What's the next big thing?
Re: Convair F-106 vs Mc Donnel Douglas F-4B Phantom
« Reply #19 on: October 10, 2007, 10:52:34 AM »
Ok. that does it. The F-106 was never a good looking plane. I mean, the F-104 looked like a pencil enough...
-JCLim

Offline Globetrotter

  • Hero of Flight
  • ******
  • Posts: 838
  • Country: ar
  • I'm Thomas (now Globetrotter)
Re: Convair F-106 vs Mc Donnel Douglas F-4B Phantom
« Reply #20 on: October 10, 2007, 11:02:48 PM »
Well, I am not planning to start a debate here. Many people will find it ugly, and some other, like me, won't be able to find anything better looking! it's just upon you
"Ad Astra Per Aspera"   (5º Grupo de Caza ≈ A-4AR Fightinghawk)

 ~ MALVINAS ARGENTINAS ~


Offline valkyrian

  • Fighter Ace
  • *****
  • Posts: 303
  • Country: gr
  • Goodbye my friend Tigershark, R.I.P.
Re: Convair F-106 vs Mc Donnel Douglas F-4B Phantom
« Reply #21 on: October 11, 2007, 10:05:42 AM »
Actually, I don't think it would have done that much better. Okay, it had the gun, but not the training. It would still have been lured into the MiG trap. F-106 is an interceptor remember, this has huge impact on the way it is used. It would have been at too close a range to use its missiles. AIM-9B was crap, whether on a F-106 or F-4. At least the F-4 had two sets of eyes in the cockpit. The F-4 could and did also outrun the MiGs. And with no huge bomb loads on the F-106 or rocket pods, you would also need more bombers. So I don't know if it would have made a difference.

My dear friend, the F-106 never carried the Sidewinder. It carried the Falcon missile, which in early models was far superior to the AIM-9. Since, most fights were close in, the difference in radar efficiency, wasn't a big factor in the equation. About the visibility, in the sixties, the -6 aquired a bubble (!) canopy for better pilot vision, but i agree with you it lacked the second pair of eyes the F-4 had.

It would never be an all around player like the F-4, no bombs could be carried, or anything air to ground, so its use would be limited as an air superiority fighter. It was maneuvrable, not as an F-5, but  better than the F-4, due to its lower wing loading. A loaded air to air -6, had less drag than a F-4, and to the eyes of the enemy, opposed an unkonown factor. U could not tell, if it was loaded or not.

But, as with the B-58, it never saw action. The B-58s were sold as aluminium and the -6 are ending their days as drones. Did i say B-58? i'm gonna put a new thread........


Offline Webmaster

  • MILAVIA Webmaster
  • Administrator
  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 2842
  • Country: nl
Re: Convair F-106 vs Mc Donnel Douglas F-4B Phantom
« Reply #22 on: October 11, 2007, 01:23:47 PM »
I know, but from what I've read the AIM-4 did not do well in Vietnam and was actually replaced by the AIM-9 on the Phantom during these years, not suitable for fighter vs fighter combat at all. So if the -106 would have been in Vietnam, it would have gotten AIM-9s before it would have been equipped with better versions of the AIM-4.

Both played their role. The Six defended North America against possible Soviet bombers, and had quite a good long career, as integral part of the air defense network...for which it was conceived in the first place. The B-58 in a way did the same, but only for much shorter time, due to its inefficiencies.
  • Interests: Su-15, Su-27, Tu-22, Tornado, RNLAF
Niels Hillebrand
MILAVIA Webmaster

Offline Raptor

  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 1388
  • Country: sg
  • What's the next big thing?
Re: Convair F-106 vs Mc Donnel Douglas F-4B Phantom
« Reply #23 on: October 12, 2007, 09:35:34 AM »
Wasn't there these chaps in a phantom who made ace in one day using the AIM-4?
-JCLim

 



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