Tag:

history

The super Starfighter that never was: the Lockheed Lancer

by Till Daisd September 3, 2021

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

History

Video of Luftwaffe F-104 Starfighters in SATS and ZELL testings

by Till Daisd August 31, 2021

written by Till Daisd

While ZELL was a system where jet fighters and attack aircraft were planned to be mounted on sizable JATO rockets coupled to movable launch platforms, SATS was a test program for takeoff and landing on short runways

This post features a stunning video of German Air Force (Luftwaffe) F-104 Starfighter aircraft being tested for the Short Air Field for Tactical Support (SATS) and zero-length launch system or zero-length take-off system (ZLL, ZLTO, ZEL, ZELL) programs.

According to the video’s description, the ZELL system was designed to allow jet fighters and assault aircraft to be launched from mobile launch platforms using sizable JATO rockets. During the Cold War in the 1950s, the majority of zero-length launch experiments were conducted.

The SATS was a test program for short runway takeoff and landing that included a catapult, carrier deck-type arresting gear, and a runway with an aluminum surface made of interlocking lightweight metal alloy planking. Several hundred takeoffs and landings were successfully completed during the testing, which were conducted at the Naval Air Test Facility in Lakehurst, New Jersey, in the United States.

The main benefit of ZELL was the removal of the requirement for a vulnerable airstrip for takeoffs. Air forces might deploy efficient air defenses and unleash airstrikes in the case of an unexpected attack, even if their own airbases were destroyed. Although employing rocket boosters to launch airplanes proved to be reasonably trouble-free, a runway was still necessary if aircraft had to land at the same location. Bulky mobile launchers also proved to be expensive to run and challenging to move. Mobile launchers would have also raised security concerns, especially if they were accompanied by strike fighters carrying nuclear weapons.

ZELL tests were carried out by the Luftwaffe, the Soviet VVS, and the U.S. Air Force (USAF). An F-84G was the first manned aircraft to be ZELL-launched in 1955. ZELL was primarily of interest to the Soviet Union because it could be used to protect airfields and important targets with MiG-19 point defense systems. The larger F-100 Super Sabre and MiG-19/SM-30 “Farmer” tests (with the SM-30 using the Soviet-designed PRD-22R booster unit) used similar short-burn solid-fueled boost motors, of much more powerful 600 kN (135,000 lbs) thrust output. The American tests with the F-84s began with using the Martin MGM-1 Matador solid-fuel boost motor with about 240 kilonewtons (52,000 lbs) thrust output.

Due to logistical issues and the growing effectiveness of guided missiles, all work on ZELL aircraft was abandoned.

The development of aircraft with vertical (VTOL) or short (STOL) takeoff and landing capabilities was also driven by the need to field combat aircraft without relying on vulnerable landing strips. British Hawker Siddeley Harrier and Soviet Yakovlev Yak-38 are two examples of this.

Photo by San Diego Air & Space Museum Archives via Wikipedia

August 31, 2021 0 comment

History

Facts about the KC-135 Stratotanker from the Operation Desert Storm

by Till Daisd August 30, 2021

written by Till Daisd

“The KC-135 was the linchpin of the fight, without fuel, fighters are inoperable”

KC-135 Stratotankers responded to a new demand for assistance in 1990 during Operation Desert Shield, which started a 25-year period of continuous U.S. Air Force (USAF) contingencies.

The tankers needed to be maintained ready to go at a moment’s notice even if combat activities hadn’t started in earnest yet.

The preparation for the upcoming conflict was advancing. As the battle was set to start, things began to pick up about the middle of January. Operation Desert Storm started on January 17, 1991, just after midnight.

“Scud launches would create a flurry of activity, which would require KC-135 support,” said Lt. Col. Larry Dillon at the time KC-135 crewmember with 190th Air Refueling Wing (ARW). “Sometimes they would need 60 or more sorties before sunrise, and the next day the surge would occur in the late afternoon or evening. As a result, our aircrews had no schedule to live by. One day they would sleep days and fly nights, the next day vice versa.”

It would be like this for the next 38 days. It was a terrific pace to keep up.

During the conflict, the KC-135 crew known as “Balls 13” consisted of Lieutenant Col. Kevin Sweeney (pilot), Capt. Jay Selanders (co-pilot), Capt. Greg Mermis (navigator), and Senior Master Sgt. Steve Stucky (boom operator). After takeoff, they came upon jet spray (the turbulence behind a large aircraft). The tanker was suddenly pitched to one side, which caused both of its left-side engines to be torn off and provided very major control issues for the fully laden tanker. The truth is that nobody had ever run with this issue outside of a simulator.

Since there had never been a successful bailout from a KC-135, it required amazing skills and teamwork from the crew, and quite possibly their lives were on the line.

The pilots were under extreme pressure just trying to keep the tanker under control; in order to get it to take off, they had to manually move the tanker around. It was necessary to empty the fuel, map a course back to base, and, most importantly, lower the gear. Sgt. Stucky had to manually pump the gear down to do this. And after accomplishing that, the large tanker landed safely. For their actions that day, the crew members would each receive a Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC).

The KC-135s were initially deployed to ferry material, according to Stephen Yavornitzki, a former boom operator during the fight. However, the task soon required hours of aerial refueling support as well.

“The KC-135 was the linchpin of the fight,” said Yavornitzki. “Without fuel, fighters are inoperable.”

Refueling in the air for the boom operator and the rest of his team’s operations usually lasted three hours, during which the aircrew worked to maintain the airworthiness of aircraft like the F-16 Fighting Falcon and F-111 Aardvark.

“We [refueled] them both pre and post-fight,” he said. “Once they would go and drop their ordinance, they would come back up, get their fuel and head back out to the fight.”

Key enemy radars, command centers, air defenses, and different airfields throughout the area were all successfully destroyed by USAF planes.

The KC-135s were busy keeping other aircraft in the air and enabling them to finish the mission, even if these operations were not directly caused by the tankers.

“The KC-135 was the workhorse, the backbone, of the fight,” said Yavornitzki.

Over the duration of the mission, tankers flew more than 4,900 sorties in 19,700 flight hours, according to Air Mobility Command (AMC). To 14,588 receivers, their crews offloaded more than 28.2 million gallons of fuel.

F-16C Fighting Falcon fighter aircraft of the 363rd Tactical Fighter Wing, Shaw Air Force Base, S.C., is refueled by KC-135 Stratotanker aircraft during the second day of Operation Desert Storm.

Source: 60 YEARS IN THE AIR: KC-135 supports Gulf War contingencies by Senior Airman Tara Fadenrecht, 22nd Air Refueling Wing Public Affairs, and U.S. Air Force; Photo by Tech. Sgt. Jason Robertson and Senior Airman Kia Atkins / U.S. Air Force; Tech. Sgt. Perry Heimer / Department of Defense

August 30, 2021 0 comment

Newer Posts

Older Posts