Tag:

aviation

How to fly and fight in the F-20 Tigershark

by Till Daisd September 3, 2021

The F-20 was far faster than the F-5E, added beyond-visual-range (BVR) air-to-air capability, and had a full complement of air-to-ground firing modes that could fire the majority of American weaponry

Northrop designed and produced the F-20 Tigershark (formerly the F-5G), a light fighter that was privately financed. It started to take shape around 1975. The aircraft, which was a development of Northrop’s F-5E Tiger II, was propelled by a new engine with significantly better overall performance and a cutting-edge avionics suite with a potent and adaptable radar.

Super ace Chuck Yeager, the first pilot to break the sound barrier, once said that “of all the airplanes in the world that I’ve flown, the F-5 is the most fun to fly.”

The F-20 was far faster than the F-5E, included beyond-visual-range (BVR) air-to-air capability, and had a full complement of air-to-ground modes that could fire the majority of American armaments. The General Dynamics F-16/79 (a modified export-oriented version of the F-16A/B designed for use with the antiquated General Electric J79 turbojet engine) and other modern fighter designs were able to compete with the F-20 as a result of these advancements, but the F-20 was significantly less expensive to buy and operate.

The famous Paramount motion picture “Top Gun” was inspired by author Ehud Yonay’s article “Top Guns” from the May 1983 issue of California magazine. You can read it today on www.topgunbio.com. Yonay writes, “The F-5 is actually a family of planes, starting with the F-5A back in 1964 and culminating last year with the F-5G Tigershark” (now called F-20). All of them are elegant, energetic beauties with trim body lines that resemble boats with wings.

The F-5 is an outlier in the high-end defense industry because it is the only fighter plane manufactured in California. It is not only compact, practical, and simple to fix, but it is also quite affordable. Even the top-of-the-line Tigershark lists for only $9 million, which is one-fourth the cost of a single F-14 Tomcat. Top Gun instructors use F-5E Tiger IIs that cost roughly $5 million each to replicate Russian MiGs. Anyone caught showing off the F-14’s classified cockpit would face court-martial, but here’s how to do a jump in an F-20:

Exclusive: former Topgun instructor presents the original article that inspired legendary Top Gun movie — F-20 Tigershark Cockpit

1. The stick. Imagine you are entering a bogey country. Push the air-to-air weapon select button with your right thumb to see what comes next. (Your head-up display and digital display indicators are now operational; this is essentially an “on” switch.)

2. The throttle. Choose “range while search” using your left index finger. On your right-hand digital display indication, a plot of the relevant range will appear that resembles a radarscope.

3. The right-hand digital display indicator. A tiny black square will show up on this screen if there is a bogey out there. Press the acquisition button on the throttle when the target is surrounded by the acquisition symbol (two parallel vertical lines) displayed on the screen to lock your radar onto its tail. The acquisition sign abruptly vanishes, and a numbered targeting circle with a black square appears in its place. This gives you a quick glance indication of the bogey’s speed, altitude, and direction.

4. The head-up display. Once you’ve reached this point, you may look directly through your head-up display and see both the actual target and the head-up steering circle, which resembles a bull’s-eye, at once.

A quick look at how you could fly and fight in the F-20 Tigershark, the super light-fighter that never was

5. The left-hand digital display indicator. Your available missiles and ammunition for your gun are listed on this screen. After selecting your weapon, fly the aircraft until the steering circle of the head-up display is directly above your target. Your head-up display will flash the word “SHOOT” when you are within the right range. Your right index finger should be used to trigger the gun or missile release on the stick.

A large portion of the F-20’s development was carried out as part of the “FX” project run by the US Department of Defense (DoD). While avoiding critical front-line technologies used by U.S. Air Force (USAF) aircraft, FX aimed to create fighters that would be capable of combat with the newest Soviet aircraft. The military export plans of the Carter administration, which attempted to give foreign countries high-quality equipment without running the risk of American front-line technology falling into Soviet hands, gave rise to FX. Northrop had great expectations for the F-20 on the global market, but once Ronald Reagan was elected, policy changes meant that the F-20 had to compete for sales against the F-16’s newest variants rather than the downgraded F-16/79.

When three prototypes had been built (two of which crashed after their pilots blacked out from too much g-force), and a fourth that was only partially finished, the F-20 Tigershark program was abandoned in 1986.

Photo by Tom Kasser, published in California magazine, May 1983 and U.S. Air Force

September 3, 2021 0 comment

History

The F-4G Wild Weasel during Operation Desert Storm dodged six SAMs in a matter of seconds

by Till Daisd September 3, 2021

written by Till Daisd

“I looked in the direction of the launch indication on the scope and saw a sight I’d never hoped to see. SA-2 missiles were headed towards us!” Jim Schreiner, former F-4G Wild Weasel pilot

The F-4G Wild Weasel was a modified F-4E fighter carrying AN/APR-47 electronic warfare equipment in place of the gun. Its goal was to take out surface-to-air missile (SAM) air defense radars, among other enemy air defenses. In order to serve this unique role, 116 F-4Es were converted into F-4Gs.

Three active wings received deployments of F-4Gs. One was deployed to USAFE (U.S. Air Forces in Europe) at Spangdahlem Air Base (AB), Germany; the other to PACAF (Pacific Air Forces) at Clark AFB, Philippines; and one was stationed at George Air Force Base (AFB), Victorville, California, as a member of the Rapid Deployment Force.

For Operation Desert Storm in 1991, F-4Gs from George AFB and Spangdahlem AB were sent to Shaikh Isa AB, Bahrain. The F-4G was the only aircraft in the USAF inventory at the time that was outfitted for Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses (SEAD) duty, and it successfully shielded strike packages from Iraqi air defenses throughout the fight.

The incredible story of the F-4G Wild Weasel that dodged 6 SAMs in few seconds During Operation Desert Storm

Brick Eisel, a former USAF officer, and Jim Schreiner, a former F-4G pilot from the 561st Tactical Fighter Squadron at George AFB who flew the aircraft during Desert Storm, describe an exciting F-4G sortie flown to protect a B-52 strike package carrying out a bombing mission over Iraq in their book Magnum! the Wild Weasels in Desert Storm.

On the night of January 19, 1991, Schreiner and his passenger Dan Sharp were piloting the second ship of a four-ship flight with the call sign Longhorn 31 that was being led by Major Steve “Teach” Jenni and Captain Mark “Gucci” Buccigrossi, an EWO. Schreiner was Longhorn 32. As Eisel explains, “The mission for the flight was to provide direct support for a cell of Boeing B-52 Stratofortresses dropping some fifty-four bombs weighing 750 lb each on the dug-in positions of one of Saddam’s vaunted Republican Guard armored divisions.

The B-52, nicknamed since its Vietnam days as the ‘BUFF’, for Big Ugly Fat Fucker, had paid a fearsome toll to North Vietnamese SA-2s in the earlier conflict. Planners for Desert Storm wanted to ensure things went better for this fight. The Longhorn flight would go in ahead of the BUFFs and target and kill the SA-2s and any other SAM that had the altitude range to reach the bombers in their high 30,000 feet track. It was a high priority, do-or-die mission for the Weasels.”

Noteworthy, since their F-4G experienced a failure to its digital ARN-101 navigation system during the previous sortie, Schreiner and Sharp had to switch two spare aircraft, a procedure that delayed their and Jenni and Buccigrossi’s takeoff. Schreiner remembers: “3 & 4 were long gone, and lead, tired of waiting for us, decided to take off without us. I could tell he was pissed because as he taxied by, he twirled his hand above his helmet, telling us to hurry up. At the time, he didn’t realize we were on our third jet. Sweating profusely by this time, I rapidly completed the preflight and got the jet running. Fortunately, everything worked, and we were out of the chocks in record time. I called the tower for take-off clearance and was told to wait for three aircraft to land. The last one was an emergency and might take the barrier and close the runway. Luckily, he didn’t, and we were off, but twenty minutes late. I proceeded to the tanker as fast as the Phantom would go without using the afterburner—about 540 knots groundspeed. Not bad considering a 50-knot headwind and all the shit we were carrying [besides the HARM missiles, the aircraft had three 1,000 gallons of external fuel tanks]. It was a little sporty at the tanker with him flying in and out of a cloud layer. The fact that I was a little nervous didn’t make it any easier. After taking a full load of fuel, we proceeded directly to the target area.”

Schreiner and Sharp made their target time and rejoined the flight. Then, as Eisel explains, “at about 0207, Buccigrossi detected an SA-2 in search mode short of the BUFFs’ intended target. Needing to deal with this threat but not wanting to strip all Weasel coverage from the bombers, he directed Longhorn 31 and 32 to deal with this problem.”

Said Buccigrossi “We picked up the SA-2’s signal—first in search mode and then rapidly switch to targeting. We then pickled a HARM at it.”

Schreiner’s view of the event was: “At the TOT for the BUFFs, we saw many explosions on the ground as they salvoed. At the same time, we picked a ‘2 bar’ on the SA-2 from the APR-47 [‘2 bar’ was shorthand for saying the system had picked up strong, reliable indications of an SA-2D/E SAM, an improved version of the original SA-2]. It went from range unknown to range known to track indications to a firing indication in about as much time as it takes to read this sentence. Lead said he was working the signal so we didn’t shoot, although, in retrospect, we should have because it was the only chance we’d have.”

Buccigrossi continues his part of the story: “We were at medium altitude at around 350 knots. There was a cloud base around 1,800-2000 feet AGL [Above Ground Level]. We picked up an orange glow below the cloud deck at nine o’clock. Popping through the undercast, we saw two SA-2s tracking toward us. Teach and I both saw them, so as he rolled the jet, I put out the chaff and hit the switches for the ECM pod. Both missiles continued towards our six o’clock but climbed while we descended fairly rapidly. I watched the missiles explode behind us.”

The Longhorn flight was allegedly targeted again just seconds after avoiding the first pair of SAMs, according to Eisel. The second pair of missiles were arcing toward Longhorn 31 from their two o’clock position. Once more, they managed to avoid the SAMs by sacrificing height and airspace to get away from the warheads. The F-4G was not harmed when the missiles, which were guided to explode slightly behind them, detonated.

Buccigrossi continues: “Immediately after those two exploded, we saw the third set on our left side, so away we went again, down and around, to avoid these guys. The missiles couldn’t turn hard enough to stay with us, so for the third time in about ninety seconds, they tracked behind us and exploded. The good news was that in less than two minutes, we’d avoided six SAMs and made that site shoot his whole wad, so they wouldn’t be able to shoot again at the BUFFs until they’d reloaded, and that would take them too long. The bad news was that with all our turning and burning, we’d dropped down into the AAA range. I looked down at our gauges and saw that we were below 10,000 feet and under 300 knots. I told Teach to climb or speed up and he said, ‘I’m working on it’.”

From Schreiner’s cockpit: “I looked in the direction of the launch indication on the scope and saw a sight I’d never hoped to see. SA-2 missiles were headed toward us! I immediately selected AB [afterburner], rolled the aircraft inverted, and pulled. All this while keeping the SA-2s on the beam. I was at 25,000 [feet] when I started for the deck and leveled at about 10,000. It was a standard maneuver we’d practiced in training but, for safety reasons, weren’t allowed to try at night – amazing how physics and the airplane work the same at night as during the day. As I did this, I told Dan to hit the chaff and ECM pod. Apparently, the combination of all three did the trick, because one by one, I watched them arc harmlessly away and self-destruct at the end of their lives. After we avoided the SAMs, I rolled level and saw a blue glow outside. Our -47 wasn’t showing any threats, so I couldn’t figure out what the glow was. Then I realized I was still in the afterburner, and the glow was the flames from my engines. What a perfect advertisement for our position! So I pulled the throttles back and started climbing so we could work that site again.”

Due to the fact that Longhorn 31 was only carrying one tank and had used a lot of gas to dodge the six SAMs, they were unable to stay. Returning to base, they flew straight south into Saudi Arabia, stopped at a base, grabbed fuel, and then took off again for Sheikh Isa.

After taking the spare equipped with three tanks, Schreiner and Sharp had additional gas and continued to stay in the area long after the B-52s left in an effort to locate the SA-2 position that had so spectacularly captured their attention. At or about 03:15, they landed at Sheikh Isa.

Major Steve Jenny and Captain Mark Buccigrossi, who were serving at the time, received the Silver Star, the third-highest honor bestowed by the U.S. military for valor in the face of the enemy, for their efforts in defending the B-52s and dodging the six SA-2s in those brief moments.

Photo by U.S. Air Force

September 3, 2021 0 comment

History

The super Starfighter that never was: the Lockheed Lancer

by Till Daisd September 3, 2021

written by Till Daisd

The Lockheed Lancer may have outclassed the majority of aircraft used by air forces throughout the world.

The F-104 Starfighter, a supersonic air superiority fighter, was a technological marvel when it first flew in the 1950s.

It was armed with a six-barrel M-61 20mm Vulcan cannon and performed the roles of a tactical fighter and a day-and-night interceptor when coupled with heat-seeking Sidewinder missiles.

The first XF-104 made its first flight in 1954, after which the F-104’s development started in 1952.

It established several records, including the world altitude record of 103,395 feet (set by an F-104C on Dec. 14, 1959) and the world speed record of 1,404.19 mph (made by an F-104A on May 18, 1958). The Starfighter was also the first aircraft to hold the official world records for speed, altitude, and time-to-climb at the same time.

About 300 one- and two-seat Starfighters were bought by the U.S. Air Force (USAF). The military aid program also saw the construction of 1,700 F-104s in the United States and elsewhere for a number of countries, including Canada, West Germany, Italy, Norway, the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, Greece, Turkey, Spain, Taiwan, and Japan.

Even though the Starfighter gave these countries a fighter with astounding performance and highly advanced capabilities, the Western European market required a fighter that was efficient and simple to operate. Even in the hands of an experienced pilot, the F-104 had repeatedly shown to be challenging to fly, let alone in their absence. This fact, along with the Starfighter’s advancing age, caused Lockheed to present (in 1971) a proposal for a replacement for the F-104 called CL-1200 Lancer, as detailed by Phillip Friddell in his book F-104 Starfighter In Action.

The Lancer was suggested to employ most F-104 parts possible. Considering that the type was still being produced in both Germany and Italy, this objective could be easily and swiftly achieved. Additionally, the F-104 was still in operation in nine European countries and six other countries, providing a ready market for the new fighter.

The CL-1200 idea, on which the Lancer was based, was created by Lockheed as a side project, and it amounted to a significant reworking of the F-104’s current design. The wing structure was around 53% larger than the Starfighter’s, the vertical tail was expanded, high lift devices, more hardpoints were added to the wings, the intake design was modified, the fuel capacity was significantly increased, and a Pratt & Whitney TF30-P-100 engine was installed. Depending on whether the aircraft was to be a single- or two-seater, the forward fuselage was to be an F-104S or TF-104G section mounted on a thirty-inch fuselage extension.

At first, the Lancer project seemed to hold out the promise of a capable light fighter for the 1980s at a price significantly lower than any brand-new air superiority aircraft. Unfortunately, some in the “Fighter Mafia” of the Air Force believed—possibly mistakenly—that the design may have a negative effect on the advancement of the then-new F-15 Eagle. Political pressure was used as a result, and the experimental name X-27 was given to the CL-1200. The Air Force complied with the suggestion that the type not be manufactured because Friddell said that the Lancer offered only limited scope and technological gains when employed as a research aircraft. No metal was cut, and the project was abandoned.

The Air Force’s reluctance to collaborate with Lockheed on the project had a good deal to do with the fact that the Lancer’s target market had always been Europe. The planned fighter did not provide the “quantum leap” in technology that would have justified significant American financial commitment, even though it could have theoretically given a high-performance aircraft at significantly lower development costs. Additionally, a number of fresh European competitors gave comparable performances.

The Lockheed Lancer: the Super Starfighter that never was

Although a full-scale mockup of the aircraft—which had a wooden fuselage covered in metal skinning and employed an F-104G‘s forward fuselage and landing gear—was built and displayed, no actual flight item was ever produced, and the program quietly died.

Photo by Lockheed Martin

September 3, 2021 0 comment

History

When a KC-135 tanker towed a damaged F-111 fighter bomber over Vietnam

by Till Daisd September 2, 2021

written by Till Daisd

We have a thing that we do call locking the toggles: when you lock the toggles on a receiver you can actually tow him. So we did that and kept giving him fuel

The renowned KC-135 Stratotanker has provided unrivaled aerial refueling and airlift support globally for 60 years to achieve quick global mobility. This aircraft has endured through all of the significant events that the U.S. Air Force (USAF) has participated in.

As you can read in the article titled 60 years in the air: The KC-135 during the Vietnam War. The KC-135 played a crucial role during the Vietnam War as well. According to Airman 1st Class Tara Fadenrecht of the 22nd Air Refueling Wing Public Affairs, the Stratotanker not only made it possible for heavy fighter-bombers to reach North Vietnamese targets and return, but it also towed them back to their bases when they were seriously damaged by enemy action.

“Mayday! Mayday! Mayday! We’ve been struck by a missile,” called the voice on the radio.

The crew of a KC-135 Stratotanker heard the signal over their headsets as they prepared to land at their base after a successful refueling mission during the Vietnam War.

Retired Maj. Jim Hickman was the tanker crew’s navigator when it got the distress signal, and he has clear memories of what happened afterward. When Hickman made the call, the crew members exchanged glances and started to consider their choices.

“Let’s go get him,” he said.

After confirming the location of the F-111 Aardvark in distress, the tanker crew yelled back over the radio and continued flying north until they could see each other.

“He pulled in behind us, we got the boom into the receptacle and started transferring fuel,” said the retired navigator.

The extent of the fighter’s damage wasn’t immediately clear until the boom operator noticed fuel dripping from the aircraft. It would require some imagination to safely return the aircraft and its crew to the base.

“We have a thing that we do call locking the toggles,” said Hickman. “When you lock the toggles on a receiver you can actually tow him. So we did that, and kept giving him fuel.”

The KC-135 flew the plane across the skies of North Vietnam on its way back to Thailand. The boom operator opened the toggles as they approached the base where it was in operation, and the F-111 aircraft glided in for a safe landing.

“That was probably one of the greatest experiences in all my time in the Strategic Air Command,” said Hickman. “There were two crew members on there. If they would have bailed out they’d have been captured and thrown in prison.”

Not just that F-111 crew in danger received assistance from the KC-135. Helping the B-52 Stratofortress was one of the tanker’s main responsibilities during this time.

“We couldn’t have survived without the KC-135 over there,” said retired Maj. Wendell Skinner, former B-52 pilot. “We were flying 16-hour missions out of Guam. We couldn’t carry enough fuel to complete the whole mission.”

With the help of the tankers, the B-52 aircrew was able to reach their destination and finish their mission, saving many lives of U.S. personnel in the process.

“Without the B-52 putting munitions on the ground we couldn’t have supported the [Soldiers and Marines] down there trying to fight the battles,” said the retired pilot. “We were attempting to curtail supply lines, we were hitting weapons arsenals and we were taking out as many of the resources as we could from the enemy so they couldn’t continue to fight. We couldn’t have put bombs on the ground without the KC-135s in the air.”

The only thing left to do after a mission was to safely return to base. Once more, the KC-135s signaled their presence.

“To make it back to Guam we absolutely had to meet that tanker,” said Skinner. “The tankers were always there, they were always on time and they enabled us to complete our mission.”

Photo by Staff Sgt. David S. Nolan, Master Sgt. Patrick Nugent, and Airman Jenna Caldwell U.S. Air Force

September 2, 2021 0 comment

History

The ASM-135A ASAT missile and the F-15 Satellite killer

by Till Daisd September 2, 2021

written by Till Daisd

The first anti-satellite missile launch from an F-15 occurred over the Pacific Ocean on January 21, 1984. No actual target was involved; the ASAT missile was launched toward a predetermined location in space

A high-performance, all-weather air superiority fighter with twin engines, the F-15. The Eagle, which made its debut in 1972, was first used by the U.S. Air Force (USAF) in 1974. The Eagle’s excellent acceleration and maneuverability are among its most remarkable features. It was the first American fighter to have an engine thrust greater than the aircraft’s basic weight, enabling it to accelerate while climbing vertically.

The Eagle was chosen to carry out the satellite-killing mission because of its high thrust-to-weight ratio (which was roughly 1,04 for a nominally laden F-15).

The United States foresaw the Soviet Union developing “killer satellites” that might obliterate crucial American communication and surveillance satellites in the late 1970s.

The F-15 satellite killer and the ASM-135A ASAT missile

The Vought ASM-135A Anti-Satellite (ASAT) missile was selected as the weapon to neutralize this danger. The ASM-135A possessed a number of intriguing features, including the AGM-69 SRAM-A nuclear air-to-surface missile’s first stage and the absence of any warhead, which required direct contact with the target in order to be destroyed. This outcome was made possible by a tiny “homing kinetic kill vehicle” with IR guidance that had to direct the ASAT on the approaching satellite’s heat source.

The North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) controllers would have employed their satellites to follow data of the target to ensure the exact position, as would be the case in a conventional engagement for an anti-satellite operation, to position the F-15 in a holding pattern. In response to NORAD’s order, the F-15 would have made a supersonic rise toward the target before launching the missile. According to Steve Davies and Doug Dildy in their book F-15 Eagle Engaged, the ASAT needed to be launched from an extraordinarily high angle (80,000ft) and high altitude (60-65 degrees).

Airborne experiments using modified F-15 fighters and “captive” (not launched) ASAT missiles with the designation CASM-135A were conducted since 1982.

The first launch of an anti-satellite missile from an F-15 over the Pacific Ocean occurred on January 21, 1984, following zoom tests carried out by two distinct F-15As from the 6512th Test Squadron. No actual target was involved; the ASAT missile was launched toward a predetermined location in space. The IR seeker was fixed to a star’s IR signature (officially referred to as a “celestial IR source”) and three further launches were made in 1985 after the initial one.

These tests, however, served as a warm-up for the one and only actual ASAT launch, which took place on September 13, 1985, when the F-15A 77-0084 destroyed the Solwind P78-1 satellite.

Since Soviet reconnaissance, maritime surveillance, and electronic intelligence satellites were frequently launched into polar orbits, the Solwind P78-1 spectrometer satellite made the ideal target simulator until it was rendered useless in 1985. The Solwind was launched into polar orbit in February 1979 as a spectrometer satellite.

The F-15 was piloted by Maj. Wilbert D. “Doug” Pearson who launched the missile during the operation, which was known as the “Celestial Eagle Flight,” from a height of 38,100 feet. The missile sped into space and zeroed in on the Solwind at a height of 345 miles. The Solwind was destroyed by the ASAT’s 11,000 mph speed and the 17,000 mph speed at which it collided with the satellite 320 miles above the planet.

Despite the test’s astounding success, the solar scientists’ outraged cries that they were still receiving data from the satellite drowned out the joy. Additionally, the ASAT test violated the recently negotiated US-USSR treaty that forbade the use of weapons in space. As a result of these worries, Congress had to reduce funds for the program, causing the USAF to stop developing the anti-satellite mission in 1988.

Pearson tells how he became the only fighter pilot in history to pull off the extraordinary accomplishment of taking down an orbiting satellite in the amazing video down below.

Photo by U.S. Air Force

Additional source: National Museum of the U.S. Air Force

September 2, 2021 0 comment

History

The F-16 test program and USAF’s choice to purchase the Lightweight Fighter

by Till Daisd September 2, 2021

written by Till Daisd

Like every operation to demonstrate a new aircraft, the YF-16 test program had its share of thrilling events

The U.S. Air Force’s (USAF) Lightweight Fighter (LWF) program sought an air superiority day fighter that was compact, light, affordable, and easy to maintain. The LWF was conceived because many people in the fighter community thought that expensive and bulky aircraft like the F-15 Eagle were unsuitable for numerous combat roles.

The General Dynamics YF-16 and the Northrop YF-17 were the two aircraft in competition for the LFW program.

A quick look at the YF-16 test program and at the USAF decision to buy the lightweight fighter — The first flight of the YF-17 occurred on Jun. 6, 1974, at Edwards AFB, California. The second YF-17 flew on Aug. 21, 1974. While never flown head-to-head, the YF-16 and YF-17 went through the same highly structured evaluation process during the competition.

For the LWF competition, two single-seat YF-16 prototypes were created. The first YF-16 was unveiled in Fort Worth on December 13, 1973. It made its maiden flight unintentionally on January 24, 1974, and then on February 2, 1974, as intended. March 9, 1974, saw the first flight of the second prototype. On January 13, 1975, the F-16, now known as the Air Combat Fighter (ACF) program because the LWF program had been renamed, won the fly-off against the Northrop YF-17 prototypes.

As Lou Drendel explains in his book F-16 Fighting Falcon In Action, the YF-16 test program had its share of thrilling events, just like every effort to prove a new aircraft. In two different cases, impurities in the fuel control units drove the F-100 engine to idle thrust, forcing the test pilots to perform dead-stick landings.

“One landing was made from 15,000 feet, on the USAF pilot’s first flight in an F-16, and the other from 1,500 feet, shortly after take-off,” says Drendel. “In neither case was the aircraft damaged. As the program progressed, it became increasingly evident that the YF-16 was going to rewrite the book on air combat maneuvering. It was possible to pull so many Gs, so fast, that the normal G-suit pressure regulator could not keep up, and a newer, faster-acting regulator that could inflate the G-suits at a rate that could keep up with the airplane’s capabilities had to be installed.”

The two YF-16s gained altitude in air battle against one another (most dogfights progress to lower altitudes as the fight occurs). “Starting at 15,000 feet, test pilots generally managed to work the fight up to 30,000 feet. Test pilot Phil Oestricher demonstrated consecutive Immelmann turns, beginning at 5,000 feet and leveling off at 25,000 feet. He indicated that a third Immelmann would have been possible,” continues Drendel. “No fighter then in operational service could have performed such a maneuver.”

A very high rate of test flights was kept up during the whole test program. Six flights were made in a single day within a period of 47 flights in 31 days. Drendel: “This was only possible because of the high degree of reliability of the YF-16’s systems. That reliability was made possible by the fact that many of the systems came from operational aircraft, which also enabled General Dynamics to hold down costs. YF-16s used an environmental control system from the A-7, control actuators from the F-111, the nose wheel from the F-4, main gear wheels and tires from the B-58, an air starter from the C-5, and the ejection seat, air data computer, generator drive and engine from the F-15.”

The USAF chose the F-16 because of these aspects, as well as the F-100 engine’s proven reliability and employment in the F-15, as well as its shown performance superiority in acceleration and overall in the transonic drag regime. After deliberating, the Navy decided to use the F/A-18, a YF-17 variant.

“Much of the resistance to an Air Force buy of the lightweight fighter had centered around the theory that it would only be an American MiG-21… small, with good acceleration and turning capability, but short on range and severely limited in diversity. When the performance of the prototypes indicated that the F-16 would exceed the MiG-21 in all categories, with none of its performance shortcomings, the Air Force did a 180 degree and began to look forward to adding the F-16 to its inventory,” concludes Drendel.

Photo by Lockheed Martin

September 2, 2021 0 comment

History

The Saudi F-15s’ controversial kills during Operation Desert Storm

by Till Daisd September 2, 2021

written by Till Daisd

The two Mirage kills achieved by RSAF F-15s were very certainly motivated by a political direction meant to highlight an Arab country. Existing sources indicate that the F1s were shot down just minutes after being able to engage their objectives

Under the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) program Peace Sun, the Royal Saudi Air Force (RSAF) ordered 16 F-15Ds and 46 F-15Cs (without some of the aircraft’s Tactical Electronic Warfare System components and sensitive radar modes). The purchase came after the Saudi monarchy made a concentrated effort to overcome a capability gap between the RSAF and the F-14 Tomcat aircraft of the Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force (IRIAF).

The U.S. administration had to take into account some very important political issues as a result of Peace Sun, not the least of which was how the sale was certain to be received by the ever-vigilant Israelis. The RSAF Eagles were downgraded to make them less effective, especially against avionics and weaponry produced in the United States, in order to reduce such tensions.

Nevertheless, in reaction to Operation Desert Shield in late 1990, 24 more jets were hurriedly delivered to the RSAF by U.S. Air Forces in Europe (USAFE) units.

According to Steve Davies in his book F-15C Eagle Units In Combat, on January 24, 1991, Capt. Ayehid Salah al-Shamrani, an F-15 pilot with No 13 Squadron, engaged and downed two Iraqi Air Force (IrAF) Mirage F1EQs, giving the RSAF its sole air-to-air victory during Operation Desert Storm. Although the details of the confrontation are vague, Davies was informed by American sources that Salah was pointed in the direction of the Mirages as soon as they were seen taking off and traveling toward coalition naval warships in the Persian Gulf.

According to reports, a USAF AWACS gave the RSAF Eagle strong vectors, but Salah supposedly found it difficult to accomplish the intercept. Salah was guided step-by-step into position behind the French-made fighters as time to get behind the Mirages, who were aiming their anti-ship Exocet missiles at the naval ships, was rapidly running out. The two AIM-9P Sidewinders he eventually used guided directly to their targets.

An F-15 Eagle aircraft of the Royal Saudi Air Force takes off during Operation Desert Shield.

As reported by Donald J. McCarthy, Jr. in his book “T he Raptors All F-15 and F-16 aerial combat victories,” after the engagement Salah commented during a media interview: “They started breaking in front of me, but it was too late. It was my day.”

One former F-15 pilot observed: “There are several very valid questions to ask about these kills. Firstly, why is the pilot of an aircraft designed to kill BVR doing a stern conversion to visual range without firing a shot? Secondly, where was his wingman during all this? Thirdly, he fired both missiles while they were still ‘caged’ if I remember correctly.”

According to Davies, it was routine procedure to “uncage” the seeker from the radar before firing since it allowed the pilot to confirm that the seeker was tracking the target. Within the fighter pilot community, it was considered a faux pas to “uncage.”

Unsurprisingly, during Desert Storm, RSAF F-15s were kept far from the “coalface,” flying what was known as “Goalie CAPs” for the remainder of the conflict. The RSAF Eagles were effectively placed in a position where they could not obstruct the efforts of the rest of the Coalition by “Goalie CAPs” that were deployed some distance below the Iraq/Saudi border.

The level of professionalism, skill, and pride among the RSAF is allegedly at best mediocre, despite one USAF pilot who did an exchange tour with them in the 1990s telling Davies that two specific Saudi F-15 pilots were the best Eagle pilots he had ever met.

It is almost clear that a political instruction intended to highlight an Arab nation was the driving force behind these two Mirage kills. The presence of nearby U.S. Navy F-14 Tomcats, which were claimed to have been in an equally favorable position to engage the Mirages and could have done so more quickly and competently, is perhaps the strongest circumstantial evidence in favor of this theory.

According to the information that is currently available, the F1s were shot down just minutes after being able to engage their objectives.

The controversial kills scored by Saudi F-15s during Operation Desert Storm — An F-15 Eagle aircraft of the Royal Saudi Air Force takes off during Operation Desert Shield.

Photo by Tech. Sgt. Hans H. Deffner / U.S. Air Force

September 2, 2021 0 comment

History

The first bombs of Operation Desert Storm were dropped by F-117 Stealth Fighters

by Till Daisd September 2, 2021

written by Till Daisd

The F-117 lighted the bunker’s entrance and directed two Paveway II LGBs, each weighing 2,000 pounds, toward the intended target. The first one destroyed the door, and the second one entered and destroyed the bunker. Once more, the F-117 pilot struck his intended target square on

The Lockheed F-117 was created in response to a request from the U.S. Air Force (USAF) for an aircraft that could attack valuable targets without being seen by adversarial radar. By the 1970s, engineers were able to create an airplane with radar-avoiding or “stealth” characteristics because of new materials and methods. The F-117A, the first operational stealth aircraft in the world, was the outcome.

On June 18, 1981, the first F-117A took to the skies, and on October 1, 1983, the 4450th Tactical Group—later renamed the 37th Tactical Fighter Wing—attained initial operational capability. On December 19, 1989, two F-117As from the 37th TFW bombed military targets in Panama as part of Operation Just Cause.

Fireworks over Baghdad: when the F-117 stealth fighters dropped the first bombs of Operation Desert Storm — Ground crews service the F-117A aircraft of the 37th Tactical Fighter Wing (37th TFW) on the flight line. The 37th TFW is preparing to deploy to Saudi Arabia for Operation Desert Shield.

The 415th and 416th squadrons of the 37th TFW relocated to a base in Saudi Arabia for Operation Desert Shield/Storm in 1990-1991, and the F-117 saw action once more during that conflict.

Operation Desert Shield changed its name to Operation Desert Storm on January 16, 1991, and the biggest aerial bombardment in the annals of contemporary warfare followed. Over 1,000 sorties were carried out on the first night of bombing against targets in Iraq and Kuwait. That is equivalent to every sortie flown during D-Day of Normandy.

The F-117As of the 37th TFW were the first manned USAF aircraft to enter hostile Iraqi airspace, as described by Jim Goodall in his book F-117 Stealth In Action. “At approximately 0130 on 17 January, two squadrons of F-117As dropped approximately sixty 2,000 pound bombs on key Iraqi air defense, command and control facilities, ammunition bunkers, SCUD surface-to-surface missile bunkers, missile storage facilities, and the headquarters of the Iraqi Air Force,” he explains.

On January 20, 1991, Gen. Schwarzkopf, the commander of American and Allied forces in the Gulf, showed a media outlet an infrared film of F-117A striking important targets in Iraq. “One of the key targets that showed the capability of the F-117A was a view of a SCUD storage facility that had three air ducts on its roof, each approximately a meter in diameter. The main air duct was identified by the F-117A pilot and the laser cursor was locked on the center of the air duct. A 2,000-pound laser-guided bomb was released and entered the bunker through the air duct. The SCUD storage bunker was totally destroyed in a spectacular explosion,” explains Goodall.

An attack on an ammo bunker close to Baghdad was another noteworthy incident that was featured on CNN and other major television networks. “The F-117A illuminated the front door of the bunker and guided two 2,000-pound Paveway II LGBs into the target. The first blew down the door; the second one went inside and blew up the bunker. Again the F-117A pilot hit his target dead center,” says Goodall.

The most impressive attack, according to Gen. Kelly, Commander of Air Force Operations in Desert Storm, was made against “My counterpart’s headquarters in downtown Baghdad.” The video depicted a rectangular, ten-story structure. An elevator shaft was located in the middle of the roof. An F-117A flew straight above the structure, locking its laser on the elevator shaft and firing a BLU-109 deep penetration weapon. The bomb has a delayed-action fuse and a reinforced steel shell that can pierce up to six feet of concrete. It appeared to go some distance inside the structure before exploding after falling through the top of the elevator shaft. The building’s four walls were visible being blasted outward in the footage.

According to Col. Al Whitley, the F-117As flew 1,271 missions during the conflict, or around one percent of the 110,000 missions flown by the Allied Air Forces, with an 80% success rate. The F-117As were the only aircraft used in assaults on heavily fortified targets in and around Baghdad on the first night of the war, accounting for 31% of all targets struck during the first twenty-four hours of the conflict.

The first bomb of the conflict was dropped by an F-117A, which was hitting a communications hub in Baghdad.

On the night of Jan. 16, 1991 “the F-117A proved beyond the shadow of a doubt that Ben Rich, of Lockheed’s Advanced Development Projects, and this team of dedicated aerospace workers had built the most capable surgical strike aircraft in the story of modern warfare,” Goodall concludes.

The following video, which includes some clips of the F-117A raid on the Baghdad communications center, was shot on the first night of Operation Desert Storm.

Photo by U.S. Air Force

September 2, 2021 0 comment

History

The F-16 CCV: the Viper that could turn without banking

by Till Daisd August 31, 2021

written by Till Daisd

“Flying formation on the F-16 CCV aircraft was a terrifying experience since it could do flat turns which robbed the wingman of important visual cues such as bank angle,” Phil Oestricher, General Dynamics test pilot

The first YF-16 (#72-1567) was rebuilt in December 1975 to become the USAF Flight Dynamics Laboratory’s Control Configured Vehicle (CCV).

The flight control surfaces of the F-16 CCV must be “decoupled” in order for them to function independently. This strategy makes it possible to perform uncommon movements like turning the airplane without banking it. The capacity to move in one plane while not simultaneously moving in another was thought to provide a fighter with innovative tactical performance characteristics. The F-16 CCV design included 8 square foot canards positioned under the intake, canted at 30-degree angles from the fuselage, as Lou Drendel explains in his book F-16 Fighting Falcon In Action.

They may be adjusted in a range of +/- 25 degrees. Additionally fitted for the testing were a cockpit panel for selecting several operating modes, buttons on the control stick to activate these modes, and an additional flight computer to supplement the regular fly-by-wire control system’s digital computer. With the help of modifications to the flight control system, pilots are now able to change their flight paths laterally and vertically without using pitch or roll inputs, as well as turn at wing level without sideslip.

Other capabilities included direct lift, which improved precision climb and descent profiles, maneuver enhancement, which made the F-16 more responsive and less susceptible to gusts and turbulence, and the ability to point the nose up or down without power changes, or left or right while maintaining a constant track across the ground. By moving fuel from one tank to another, the fuel system was modified to allow the aircraft’s center of gravity to be adjusted.

A quick look at the F-16 CCV, the Viper that could turn without banking — YF-16 Nos. 1 and 2 parking with the first two full-scale development F-16s.

The flight test program was divided into four main stages, according to Drendel. Functional tests of the YF-16 in this configuration, an assessment of the various flight modes, operational applications that could be made with the CCV configuration, and relaxed stability experiments for which the canards were taken off were among them.

The fundamental airframe of the F-16 was built to endure side forces of up to 2G. The CCV configurations’ computers were programmed to support up to 0.9G. The lack of support for the pilot’s upper torso caused side pressures above 0.7G to be extremely exhausting for the pilots, which suggests that an aircraft built from the ground up to be a CCV would have some very radical features. Flying in formation with the CCV aircraft, according to General Dynamics test pilot Phil Oestricher, was a harrowing experience since the plane could make flat spins, depriving the wingman of crucial visual clues like bank angle.

On March 6, 1976, the CCV YF-16 made its first flight. The single setback to the flight test program, which ran from June 24, 1976, to June 30, 1977, was a rough landing that forced a delay in testing while repairs were made. After the CCV program’s effectiveness was determined, a more ambitious follow-up effort known as the “Advanced Fighter Technology Integration” (AFTI) F-16 was launched.

Photo by Lockheed Martin

August 31, 2021 0 comment

History

This is why the A-10 Warthog can’t be replaced by F-16 CAS variants

by Till Daisd August 31, 2021

written by Till Daisd

Due to the F-16’s severe vulnerability to ground fire down low during Desert Storm, the A-10 performed better in the CAS role

The U.S. Air Force (USAF) began work on the A-16, close air support (CAS) derivative of the basic F-16 armed with a 30 mm cannon and 7.62 mm Minigun pods, in the 1980s in an effort to replace the A-10 Thunderbolt II. A number of F-16A Block 15 aircraft were upgraded to this configuration and painted in the “European One” camouflage pattern. The A-16 was never produced because of a Congressional directive issued to the USAF on November 26, 1990, requiring it to keep two wings of A-10s. The type was to have been given the name “Block 60.”

The USAF decided to upgrade 400 Block 30/32 F-16s with new equipment to execute CAS and battlefield air interdiction (BAI) operations rather than upgrading the A-10 as the second result of that instruction. The F/A-16 project included innovative technology such as a digital terrain-mapping system, a GPS for better navigational and weapon delivery precision, and an Automatic Target Handoff System (ATHS) to enable direct digital target/mission data interchange between the pilot and ground forces. But in January 1992, this strategy was abandoned in favor of installing Low Altitude Navigation and Targeting Infrared for Night (LANTIRN) pods on Block 40/42 F-16C/D aircraft.

Here's why F-16's CAS variants failed to replace the A-10 Warthog

The 174th Tactical Fighter Wing (TFW), a New York Air National Guard unit that switched from the A-10 in 1988, had 24 F-16A/B Block 10 aircraft that were equipped with the 30 mm GAU-13/A four-barrel variant of the seven-barrel GAU-8/A cannon in 1991. On the centerline station, this weapon was kept in a General Electric GPU-5/A Pave Claw gun pod and had 353 rounds of ammo. There were also plans to equip A-10s with the AN/AAS-35V Pave Penny laser spot tracker and convert F-16C aircraft to this configuration. Trials were put on hold after two days due to the gun’s considerable vibration, which made flying and targeting the aircraft challenging.

During Operation Desert Storm, when both aircraft were heavily employed in the conflict and significant data on their success rates in various types of missions was available, the A-10 vs F-16 argument was reignited. The Block 10 F-16 possessed the benefit of speed and full night capability, whereas the A-10 required the employment of flares to light up the battlefield or a second A-10, as recounted by Ken Neubeck in his book A-10 Warthog Mini In Action.

Nevertheless, despite these benefits, the F-16 performed worse than the A-10 in Desert Storm in the CAS role, largely because it was more open to ground fire down low. The F-16 was compelled to fly at higher altitudes because it lacked the A-10’s tough survival features. The Maverick missile and gun strafing capabilities of the A-10 were more precise than the F-16’s weaponry at higher altitudes. The F-16’s 30 mm gun pod attachment turned out to be unstable and inaccurate.

As Neubeck says “the war had proved conclusively that the modified F-16 cannot replace the A-10 Warthog and perform all aspects of the CAS mission. The A-10 was truly the only aircraft that was built solely for the CAS mission. Many experts feel that the results of the war show that the U.S. would do well to continue to have a mix of aircraft including the ‘air-to-mud’ types.”

The idea of replacing the A-10 with the F-16 was described by former Pentagon engineer Pierre Sprey, who worked on the F-16 and A-10 programs as “one of the most monumentally fraudulent ideas the Air Force has ever perpetrated.” As told by Neubeck, Mr. Sprey would later summarize the A-10’s war accomplishments in the September 1991 issue of the IEEE Spectrum (the magazine edited by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers). Sprey stated that “among the aircraft, the ‘low tech’ A-10 – much despised by the U.S. Air Force brass – was the real hero of the air war. Even though it represents only one-twelfth of the fighter force, it flew one-third of the sorties and accounted for two-thirds of the tank kills claimed during the air campaign and better than nine/tenths of the artillery kills. It dominated the interdiction campaigns against the roads. The aircraft proved tough enough to survive the anti-aircraft exposure and fire anti-tank Maverick missiles, while the F-16s, F-111s, and F-18s were just too vulnerable to ground guns to be usable in this role.”

Block 10 F/A-16s were eventually phased out as a result.

Photo by U.S. Air Force

August 31, 2021 0 comment

Newer Posts

Older Posts