Grumman XF11F-2 Super Tiger

[blackkite]

Grumman F-11 1F Supertiger : Corwin Meyer : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

Naval Fighters N° 44

archive.org

 

[blackkite]

Followings are continuation of ＃159.

President Hull of Lockheed's overseas business company remained in Japan after the G-98-J-11 was selected as the next fighter jet, and conducted a fierce sales campaign for the F-104. In addition to Lockheed, Convair was promoting the F-102 and F-106, and Northrop was also selling the N-156F. The uproar spread from within the Liberal Democratic Party to the Diet.

The House of Representatives Accounts Committee took up the issue in August 1958 and began investigating government officials on suspicion of corruption in the selection of G-98-J-11. Prime Minister Kishi, government officials, and Liberal Democratic Party officials were summoned as witnesses, but no evidence of corruption was found.

After that, there was a debate that the G-98-J-11 was a ghost fighter with only blueprints, and that it was not desirable to spend blood tax money on it, and in the tumultuous atmosphere, the government passed the year without being able to select the next fighter.

The National Defense Council held on June 15, 1959, reached the following conclusions:

"We will scrap the unofficial decision to select the F11F-1F for the next fighter jet, and send a new survey team to the United States to decide on the model."

Three days after the decision, Ino resigned, and Akagi, who had been Chief Cabinet Secretary, became the head of the Defense Agency. Air Admiral Sato, Chief of Air Staff, also resigned on July 18, and Commander Genda was appointed Chief of Air Staff.
From August 8 to October 26, 1959, a survey team headed by Air Chief Genda conducted another survey of the next fighter in the United States. In response to the report, the National Defense Council held on November 6 decided to adopt a modified version of the F-104C for Japan as the next fighter.

Akagi, the head of the Defense Agency, explained the reason for the selection at a press conference as follows.
１．The F-104 has an unrivaled climbing perfprmance.
2. The maximum speed is excellent, the surplus energy at high altitude is maximum, and the combat power is the strongest.
3. Excellent maneuverability at supersonic speeds
4. Easy to operate on the ground.
5. Safety concerns have been resolved.
6. Radius of action, runway length required meet the demand.
7. All weather ability could be added.
8. At the final stage of the investigation, the F-104 and F-106 were candidates.

 

[blackkite]

Hi!
USAF display model.

 

[bobtdwarf]

IIRC, one was a stock F11F airframe with the J65 swapped out for the J79 with no other changes. While the other had a few aerodynamic improvements made to the wing

Yup, and the stock airframe with the engine swap could make Mach 1.61-maybe Mach 1.84; it has been to long since I read the book to remember if they pushed her that far or if the modified one started at 1.84 and went up to 2.04

 

[bobtdwarf]

Hi! Dorsal launcher.
Also you can see folded ventral vertical tail fin.

蛇乃目伍長の「エアフォースの英国面に来い！」 Mk.2 : 虎よ、虎…よ？

blog.livedoor.jp

The F11F was developed to be the U.S. Navy's first supersonic carrier-based fighter, but its service period was shortened due to the inadequacy of the engine.
In 1955, Grumman developed the F11F-1F Super Tiger, an improved version of the F11F-1F that replaced the engine with the powerful GE J-79, but the Navy was not interested.
The F11F-1F sought overseas sales channels, and at one point almost became the winner of the Air Self-Defense Force's FX selection, but was ultimately defeated by the Lockheed F-104.

Since it was originally a small aircraft, even if the engine was strengthened, not only did the cruising range decrease, but the lack of versatility was not solved.

Perhaps that's why the development plan for the F11F-1F attempted to add more hardpoints.

But the place is a little too whimsical.
The plan was to mount the AIM-9 in tandem on the Dorsal spine/launcher, and the first unit (Bu No. 138646) was actually equipped with it.
In addition, two parallel shots on the underside of the fuselage and two shots on the outboard pylons of the main wing (AIM-7) for a total of 6 shots! Boom!

However, there is no denying the feeling of suffering. (In addition, the folded bentralphin can be confirmed)
This is because the AIM-9 (dummy) in front interferes with the sliding windshield.

By the way, this design was "98J-5" and the aircraft for Japan was "98J-11", so if you are lucky (of course, you can also see "if you are unlucky"), it is possible that the Super Tiger with this armament configuration would have flown in the skies of Japan.

Two prototypes of the F11F-1F were built, and the project was closed.
The first unit in question, Bu No. 138646, was used for fire training and was scrapped at some point in the 1980s.

the top view in color shows that they could fully open the canopy.. As to range? Just swapping the J-65 with the J-79 improved range by over 20% as well as loiter time, range was over 1500 NM compared to just over 1200 with the J-65. Without the dorsal AAM's she could still carry 9000+ pounds so pretty versatile when you install the radar you can even keep your guns.

 

[bobtdwarf]

The thing we frequently forget or just plain did not know; is the USN was legally restricted to operating a single type/make of all weather fighter and day fighter. I do not personally know if the legislation allowed for a general purpose fighter but I suspect that it did not. If it did I think it likely one of two scenarios would have played out: The least likely, classify the Phantom as a GP fighter so they could also purchase the Crusader III as there are indication that they wanted it as well, and the most likely IMHO the purchase of the Super Tiger as the GP so that it could add sparrow capability to the SCB-125 and bolster the A-4 in the strike role on everything.

 

[BlackBat242]

The thing we frequently forget or just plain did not know; is the USN was legally restricted to operating a single type/make of all weather fighter and day fighter. I do not personally know if the legislation allowed for a general purpose fighter but I suspect that it did not. If it did I think it likely one of two scenarios would have played out: The least likely, classify the Phantom as a GP fighter so they could also purchase the Crusader III as there are indication that they wanted it as well, and the most likely IMHO the purchase of the Super Tiger as the GP so that it could add sparrow capability to the SCB-125 and bolster the A-4 in the strike role on everything.

I have never heard of any such law or regulation... do you have anything that would help us find it so we can look at the actual wording?

Wondering, since in the mid-late 1950s the USN operated F9F Cougar, F7U Cutlass, FJ Fury, & F11F Tiger day fighters, F3D Skyknight & F4D Skyray all-weather/night fighters, F3H Demon A-A missile fighters (and A-A missile versions of the F3D & F7U) as well as early F8U Crusader day fighters in varying overlapping combinations depending on the aircraft carrier type.

 

[Archibald]

The thing we frequently forget or just plain did not know; is the USN was legally restricted to operating a single type/make of all weather fighter and day fighter. I do not personally know if the legislation allowed for a general purpose fighter but I suspect that it did not.

Same as @BlackBat242 not to embarass you but - because it would be pretty interesting to read how the Crusader + Phantom duopoly of Vietnam fame, was "carved into stone" by Congress or someone else.
Wonder if it also applied to Tomcat+Hornet.
Also F-111B + "first VFAX" , circa 1967-68.

I've long been fascinated by "First VFAX / 1967 VFAX" if only because the Mirage G could have done it. Just like Hornet was "two-third of Tomcat", Mirage G could have been "two-third of F-111B".

 

[bobtdwarf]

I have never heard of any such law or regulation... do you have anything that would help us find it so we can look at the actual wording?

Wondering, since in the mid-late 1950s the USN operated F9F Cougar, F7U Cutlass, FJ Fury, & F11F Tiger day fighters, F3D Skyknight & F4D Skyray all-weather/night fighters, F3H Demon A-A missile fighters (and A-A missile versions of the F3D & F7U) as well as early F8U Crusader day fighters in varying overlapping combinations depending on the aircraft carrier type.

I don't, I have just heard it referenced in multiple places including quotes in books, all I know is it supposed to have been done in '58(or after). I too want to read the wording of it, but in all the references to it they never name the act and without that it makes searching it out a real PITA.

EDIT: I am reasonably sure that we have seen references to the USN also wanting the Crusader III, without some restriction on type/model there would be basically nothing preventing them from acquiring it and in the case of the SuperTiger there is not enough difference between it and the Tiger logistically to do so given that they kept the type in use in training command for years it already had an active logistics train and if using the APQ-50 that was already in the fleet... it would have been the easiest acquisition and deployment.

 

[SSgtC]

I don't, I have just heard it referenced in multiple places including quotes in books, all I know is it supposed to have been done in '58(or after). I too want to read the wording of it, but in all the references to it they never name the act and without that it makes searching it out a real PITA.

EDIT: I am reasonably sure that we have seen references to the USN also wanting the Crusader III, without some restriction on type/model there would be basically nothing preventing them from acquiring it and in the case of the SuperTiger there is not enough difference between it and the Tiger logistically to do so given that they kept the type in use in training command for years it already had an active logistics train and if using the APQ-50 that was already in the fleet... it would have been the easiest acquisition and deployment.

IF the Navy was going to buy a second Sparrow armed fighter, it 100% would have been the Crusader III. Beyond simply being faster, it also had range for days (seriously, the Crusader III had more range on internal fuel than the Phantom II did with a 600 gallon external tank), and carried a heavier missile load than the Tiger II did. It was also designed to take the same radar as the Phantom II, rather than the older APQ-50.

 

[bobtdwarf]

IF the Navy was going to buy a second Sparrow armed fighter, it 100% would have been the Crusader III. Beyond simply being faster, it also had range for days (seriously, the Crusader III had more range on internal fuel than the Phantom II did with a 600 gallon external tank), and carried a heavier missile load than the Tiger II did. It was also designed to take the same radar as the Phantom II, rather than the older APQ-50.

All true, I just don't know for certain if it would operate off SCB-125 at the moment. Main point being ST would have been absolutely brain dead easy to adopt and we both know it would operate off an Essex. If there is nothing stopping the navy from continuing to operate a veritable flying circus they would have continued to do so and bought both just to be damn sure they have the right club for the hole

 

[SSgtC]

All true, I just don't know for certain if it would operate off SCB-125 at the moment. Main point being ST would have been absolutely brain dead easy to adopt and we both know it would operate off an Essex. If there is nothing stopping the navy from continuing to operate a veritable flying circus they would have continued to do so and bought both just to be damn sure they have the right club for the hole

It would have easily operated off the modernized Essex class. At 37,000 pounds, the Crusader III had a power off stall speed of only 134 knots. Given that the C11 catapult installed on the Essex class could launch 39,000 pounds at 136 knots, in real terms, the Essex class could launch a Crusader III while it was tied up pierside. The Essex class are the ideal ships for the Crusader III.

And I'm not so sure about the logistics of the Tiger II. Yes, the Navy flew the F-11A for a number of years, but the line stopped production in 1957. Any spares that the Navy needed after that point would have come from canabalised aircraft.

But the biggest factors that would preclude a Tiger II purchase over the Crusader III, are operational. The Crusader III had a combat radius of 562 miles, and could fly the CAP mission with almost 2 hours of loiter time without inflight refueling. And again, the Crusader III could take the APQ-72/120/AWG-10 system.

There's one other minor issue point that I think would swing in the Crusader's favor. It was a better plane to reduce pilot fatigue. It had probably the most advanced autopilot in the world at the time. At that time, most autopilots were a secondary system. Meaning, the pilot would have to hand fly the aircraft onto the heading and altitude he wanted, then tell the AP to maintain that. The Crusader's AP could turn the plane on its own. It had a Heading Select function that let the pilot adjust course just by turning a knob. And by all accounts, it tamed the OG Crusader's bad habits with landing and recovery onboard.

 

[bobtdwarf]

It would have easily operated off the modernized Essex class. At 37,000 pounds, the Crusader III had a power off stall speed of only 134 knots. Given that the C11 catapult installed on the Essex class could launch 39,000 pounds at 136 knots, in real terms, the Essex class could launch a Crusader III while it was tied up pierside. The Essex class are the ideal ships for the Crusader III.

And I'm not so sure about the logistics of the Tiger II. Yes, the Navy flew the F-11A for a number of years, but the line stopped production in 1957. Any spares that the Navy needed after that point would have come from canabalised aircraft.

But the biggest factors that would preclude a Tiger II purchase over the Crusader III, are operational. The Crusader III had a combat radius of 562 miles, and could fly the CAP mission with almost 2 hours of loiter time without inflight refueling. And again, the Crusader III could take the APQ-72/120/AWG-10 system.

There's one other minor issue point that I think would swing in the Crusader's favor. It was a better plane to reduce pilot fatigue. It had probably the most advanced autopilot in the world at the time. At that time, most autopilots were a secondary system. Meaning, the pilot would have to hand fly the aircraft onto the heading and altitude he wanted, then tell the AP to maintain that. The Crusader's AP could turn the plane on its own. It had a Heading Select function that let the pilot adjust course just by turning a knob. And by all accounts, it tamed the OG Crusader's bad habits with landing and recovery onboard.

Don't disagree just going to point out that the line was not torn down so could be started up again, as far as I am aware they did not dismantle things until after the A-7 was awarded as the Grumman entry was based on the Tiger. This is looking like if they did not have restrictions they would not have bought the F-8. I still think ST would make a good purchase because of its A2G capability which was superior to the F-8U variants. I use the example of APQ-50 to stress the low cost, it could also carry the 74 like the Cru III, though not the AP as far as I am aware.

There has to be some kind of legislative hog tying here as I think we would all agree that without such there are more effective combinations of available airframes that could have been fielded; but if you are stuck with 1 all weather and 1 day fighter the best combo IS the F-8/F-4! If you don't have that then you would logically go F-4, Cru III and ST to give you the maximum amount of zoom-zoom and boom-boom.

 

[GK Dundas]

I keep looking at the ST as something you might fly off an improved Centaur. But keep coming back to the issue of catapults.
I just don't see them having the power to launch a fully loaded one

 

[Archibald]

There has to be some kind of legislative hog tying here as I think we would all agree that without such there are more effective combinations of available airframes that could have been fielded; but if you are stuck with 1 all weather and 1 day fighter the best combo IS the F-8/F-4! If you don't have that then you would logically go F-4, Cru III and ST to give you the maximum amount of zoom-zoom and boom-boom.

How about the F5D Skylancer (muhahahaha, evil laugh...) ?

 

[bobtdwarf]

I keep looking at the ST as something you might fly off an improved Centaur. But keep coming back to the issue of catapults.
I just don't see them having the power to launch a fully loaded one

We kicked that around in a "what if" thread and it depends on what other things they do to the ST like BLC and a slightly larger wing but a full bomb truck with full fuel load out is probably a no go without some tweaks. Would have to reread the thread to see what max T/O weight we noodled out was but as I recall an A2A load out would be workable.

This is part of the reason why I bought that the references I have seen to some kind of a legislative restriction being in place was legit... if there is not then there are better combos with more beneficial outcomes possible.