What if Germany did not go for the F-104

CV12Hornet

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Jan 8, 2021
Messages
152
Reaction score
306
The problem is that an engine retrofit is probably out of the budget of most of the air forces involved. Interim fits have a tendency to become permanent and I'd expect in this case that any initial Avon fit would be the permanent fit.

The only air force I can see actually going with the RB.106 Super Tiger would be the Italians; 1966 at the outside means an RB.106 Super Tiger slots in well into the space the F-104S fit into OTL, and that model included an uprated J79 engine with almost 2000 lbs more wet thrust than the -11A version initially equipping the F-104G.
 

zen

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2007
Messages
2,932
Reaction score
1,697
No much earlier, if funded from '57 in a turn around from bigger version RB.122. Then Lightning and Draken are clear target markets, but a German potential order could clinch the shift. RR would jump on the Germans and be yelling in the ears of ministers. Especially as funds are mostly shifting to Bristol after '57.

ISD likely '62 to '64. Possible fallout is Spey (scaled down Medway), RR may just continue pushing Medway if they can swing BOAC back.
Irony is RB.106 reheat chamber work is very likely what formed basis of Spey 202 reheat Chambre
 

bobtdwarf

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
204
Reaction score
395
'62-'64 as the ISD seems doable. As long as her AB doesn't get larger than 41 inches around there is no need to do any sheet metal work like on the F-4K.. the J-65 that the F-11 came with originally was 41 inches around at the AB, the J-79 was 38.3 from the SAC sheet on the B, 39.6 on the S.

IF..IF.. the RB.106 performs as projected with 15,000 pounds static dry thrust that puts our projected bird cracking Mach 2 at military power and cruising at over Mach one really easily! We might not need the AB.

But even if we go with the most boring alteration... sticking to only historically available power plants we don't have a bad aircraft here.
 

1635yankee

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Aug 18, 2020
Messages
98
Reaction score
105
As I understand it, the F-104 relied on blown flaps for low altitude/low speed handling reasons. This blown flap/slat system would put extra demand on the engine, would it not? Was the blown flap/slat system prone to failure? It is interesting that those operators as mentioned, that operated the aircraft in its intended role, had few problems which would suggest that the super Tiger might not have experienced the loss rate the F-104 did. There was a senior commander (Erich Hartmann) in the Lufwaffe who resigned/retired early over the issue so problems were expected from someone who after all was an extremely experienced pilot who should have been listened to

BLC ducting and valving does add a potential failure mode, and certainly concerns like airflow distortion, dependent on intake design and ducting, are specific to the airframe. On the other hand, when the BLC system is operational, then the engine bleed will tend to reduce the chances of compressor stall (this is why jet engines frequently use bleed valves to prevent compressor stalls). GE in the design of the J79, chose a single-spool design, which required the engine to have quite a lot of variable geometry in the compressor. Variable guide vanes tend to be more susceptible to FOD than fixed geometry. That variable geometry adds quite a few failure modes.
 

Hood

ACCESS: Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
2,845
Reaction score
3,534
Reading Tony Buttler's ASP: Vol 4 last night, found mention that Grumman were looking at a unreheated TF-30 powered F-11 for the VA(lit) competition before they settled on the G-128-12 single-seat A-6.
Given this was circa mid-1962, so far too late to influence the choices made for the F-104 but shows that the F-11 was not out of further growth potential.
 

Foo Fighter

I came, I saw, I drank some tea (and had a bun).
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2016
Messages
2,546
Reaction score
1,501
As I understand it, the F-104 relied on blown flaps for low altitude/low speed handling reasons. This blown flap/slat system would put extra demand on the engine, would it not? Was the blown flap/slat system prone to failure? It is interesting that those operators as mentioned, that operated the aircraft in its intended role, had few problems which would suggest that the super Tiger might not have experienced the loss rate the F-104 did. There was a senior commander (Erich Hartmann) in the Lufwaffe who resigned/retired early over the issue so problems were expected from someone who after all was an extremely experienced pilot who should have been listened to

BLC ducting and valving does add a potential failure mode, and certainly concerns like airflow distortion, dependent on intake design and ducting, are specific to the airframe. On the other hand, when the BLC system is operational, then the engine bleed will tend to reduce the chances of compressor stall (this is why jet engines frequently use bleed valves to prevent compressor stalls). GE in the design of the J79, chose a single-spool design, which required the engine to have quite a lot of variable geometry in the compressor. Variable guide vanes tend to be more susceptible to FOD than fixed geometry. That variable geometry adds quite a few failure modes.
Thanks mate, nice to know rather than assume.
 

bobtdwarf

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
204
Reaction score
395
Something has been gnawing at the back of my brain for a few days now: The nagging suspicion that the SuperTiger was deliberately and with malice aforethought murdered and I am not sure where to explore best.

IF the USN does not let Grumman out of their promise to decline the German contract, I have no clue what the Germans are going to do if Starfighter is also not an option. Perhaps a mix of an F-8 variant and Buccaneer?

That promise is something that I missed when I first read the book.. I was scanning for numbers and different stuff so I am giving myself a tiny break for missing it.. is the basis for my suspicion on the murder of the ST. Parts of the timeline are somewhat unclear as to when the various nations that were on the verge of signing or had signed part of the deal and then backed out; but I wonder if it had been any nation would that same hint at looking to fat have come? You have to be fairly high up the food chain to talk directly to Mr. Grumman one would think, let alone put some pressure on him. This is going to be bugging me....
 

SSgtC

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Jul 13, 2020
Messages
832
Reaction score
1,502
Something has been gnawing at the back of my brain for a few days now: The nagging suspicion that the SuperTiger was deliberately and with malice aforethought murdered and I am not sure where to explore best.

IF the USN does not let Grumman out of their promise to decline the German contract, I have no clue what the Germans are going to do if Starfighter is also not an option. Perhaps a mix of an F-8 variant and Buccaneer?

That promise is something that I missed when I first read the book.. I was scanning for numbers and different stuff so I am giving myself a tiny break for missing it.. is the basis for my suspicion on the murder of the ST. Parts of the timeline are somewhat unclear as to when the various nations that were on the verge of signing or had signed part of the deal and then backed out; but I wonder if it had been any nation would that same hint at looking to fat have come? You have to be fairly high up the food chain to talk directly to Mr. Grumman one would think, let alone put some pressure on him. This is going to be bugging me....
Personally, I think the Navy made the decision that the Crusader had more growth potential than the Tiger did and elected to kill the Super Tiger in the cradle. Is really hard to argue that they made the wrong call. The Crusader served with the fleet as a fighter through to 1976, in the photo recon role until 1991 (active duty to 1987), and in foreign service all the way up to 2000. Not bad for an early 1950s design.
 

CV12Hornet

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Jan 8, 2021
Messages
152
Reaction score
306
IF the USN does not let Grumman out of their promise to decline the German contract, I have no clue what the Germans are going to do if Starfighter is also not an option. Perhaps a mix of an F-8 variant and Buccaneer?
The Buccaneer is the obvious choice for the Marineflieger; they really wanted it, and it's a good fit for the job.

The Crusader was not offered to the Germans; the other two options offered were the F-100J (all-weather variant with Crusader-style nose and intake) and the N-156 (which became the F-5), neither of which are particularly appealing. Both are sub-mach 2 and exist only on paper, considerations which were what put the Super Tiger and F-104G ahead to begin with.
 

Archibald

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
7,731
Reaction score
6,957
Something has been gnawing at the back of my brain for a few days now: The nagging suspicion that the SuperTiger was deliberately and with malice aforethought murdered and I am not sure where to explore best.

IF the USN does not let Grumman out of their promise to decline the German contract, I have no clue what the Germans are going to do if Starfighter is also not an option. Perhaps a mix of an F-8 variant and Buccaneer?

That promise is something that I missed when I first read the book.. I was scanning for numbers and different stuff so I am giving myself a tiny break for missing it.. is the basis for my suspicion on the murder of the ST. Parts of the timeline are somewhat unclear as to when the various nations that were on the verge of signing or had signed part of the deal and then backed out; but I wonder if it had been any nation would that same hint at looking to fat have come? You have to be fairly high up the food chain to talk directly to Mr. Grumman one would think, let alone put some pressure on him. This is going to be bugging me....
Personally, I think the Navy made the decision that the Crusader had more growth potential than the Tiger did and elected to kill the Super Tiger in the cradle. Is really hard to argue that they made the wrong call. The Crusader served with the fleet as a fighter through to 1976, in the photo recon role until 1991 (active duty to 1987), and in foreign service all the way up to 2000. Not bad for an early 1950s design.

One of the few advantage the Super Tiger had over the Crusader was a fatter nose for larger radars (the Crouze bullet wasn't practical), and hitting Mach 2 rather than Mach 1.7.
Except the Phantom had the same advantages... and many others.

What I came to understand is that

- the Super Tiger was allowed to happen because "naval interceptor / J79 / to Mach 2" was to be tested for the Phantom.

- the Skylancer was allowed to happen on behalf of "let's see if that daring Sparrow II can be make to work, otherwise: Sparrow III on larger fighters - Demon interim, then either Crusader III or Phantom - is the way to go".

There was no room left between "basic Crusader I / II" and "Phantom".
In fact the interim Sparrow III F3H Demons filled the small gap there.

What it is still very unclear is the following.

It seems that circa 1956-57 the USN considered all four options above, had hard time to pick a winner, and then went with the lower risk approach - two seats with SARH.

With perfect hindsight, do we know what was the most realstic option ?
- single seater with Sparrow II, active homing
- single seater with Sparrow III, semi-active homing
- two-seater with Sparrow III, semi-active homing
 
Last edited:

alertken

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 20, 2007
Messages
692
Reaction score
381
(I have experience of UK procurement system, none of US...but, assuming broad consistency:
selling armaments is different and AW-capable a/c are different again. Export Approvals come down from the Main Man).

The first whiff of a customer Prospect comes from the in-country Embassy of the prospective Supplier: so, Defence and/or Commercial Attache. Their career is enhanced by being initiator of a Big Deal. US/Bonn Attaches will have fed back FRG appetite to have more local content in successors to F-84s/F-86s. Separate lines of interest are Marketing teams of...Grumman, Lockheed, Northrop, Vought, who instantly lobby DoD to favour ME!

So: Grumman has several active DoD prospects - inc Mohawk: more than their competitors. But it is not Grumman's mahogany row that tells USN: "don't worry my boy, we will decline FRG and attend only to you". Its DoD (so SecDef, so the Main Man) who (might) say that.
But he would not. DoD would try to measure the effect on DoD-business of Grumman's support to a Euro-licence: some R&D, lots of Production Control. Chevrolet invented that long ago, UK to this day does not understand it. Chop up the job into bite-sized pieces to be handled by semi-skilled labour, located somewhere on Amtrak's network.

Just as (we now know) Lockheed was able to serve F-104G licence-prog while handling black progs., so DoD would have Aided Grumman, say by managing a dispersed, out-sourced structure-supply scheme for DoD Intruders et al. See Kaiser for C-119s, recently see Boeing turning turf in S.Carolina, employing non-Engineering hires, to assemble (remember Grumman, like most manufacturers, was actually an assembler) 787s - now sole-source. If the MainMan saw National Interest in an FRG ST he would have caused such a solution. Grumman's bosses would have been told, with greenbacks, what was required. I doubt ST was killed for any nefarious motive. I go with #168,SSgtC.
 
Last edited:

Hood

ACCESS: Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
2,845
Reaction score
3,534
It's strange that every cancelled aircraft is tainted with the whiff of conspiracy. So much so that its cliché.

As with recent posts of the CF-105's performance on this forum, it's clear that just because something looks 'cool' and is meant to be the finest object conceived by the best brains in the industry doesn't actually mean that it was capable of meeting the hype or capable of meeting its requirements or showing superlative advantages over the competition.

I don't see it as a conspiracy. Grumman was keeping in with its biggest buyer, the USN, who wanted every aircraft they could get out of the factories. The USN was hardly short of choices given the size it was, the Skylancer and Crusader III would likewise prove surplus to their requirements. And in truth Grumman had very few export successes for its naval fighters (Argentina brought two new F9F-8T trainers Cougars but its Panthers had been ex-USN stock) to get its management that excited about a big export drive to Germany.
It's clear that if there was any shenanigans then it was the German's themselves that talked themselves into the F-104, Lockheed were out for number one, they weren't necessarily interested in crippling the Super Tiger per se but in getting ahead of the entire playing field.

The view from the US side on Grumman Vs Lockheed certainly adds to some perspective to the stories of poor old Aubrey Jones waiting up on Christmas Eve, not for Santa but for Bonn to ring through an order for the Saro P.177. Sandys had it right, it was better to pack it up lock, stock and barrel and not wait around for Bonn (or Tokyo) to call, Lockheed had already stuffed their Christmas stockings with dollars way before the Christmas season. Export dreams for the Saro were just that.
 

bobtdwarf

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
204
Reaction score
395
Something has been gnawing at the back of my brain for a few days now: The nagging suspicion that the SuperTiger was deliberately and with malice aforethought murdered and I am not sure where to explore best.

IF the USN does not let Grumman out of their promise to decline the German contract, I have no clue what the Germans are going to do if Starfighter is also not an option. Perhaps a mix of an F-8 variant and Buccaneer?

That promise is something that I missed when I first read the book.. I was scanning for numbers and different stuff so I am giving myself a tiny break for missing it.. is the basis for my suspicion on the murder of the ST. Parts of the timeline are somewhat unclear as to when the various nations that were on the verge of signing or had signed part of the deal and then backed out; but I wonder if it had been any nation would that same hint at looking to fat have come? You have to be fairly high up the food chain to talk directly to Mr. Grumman one would think, let alone put some pressure on him. This is going to be bugging me....
Personally, I think the Navy made the decision that the Crusader had more growth potential than the Tiger did and elected to kill the Super Tiger in the cradle. Is really hard to argue that they made the wrong call. The Crusader served with the fleet as a fighter through to 1976, in the photo recon role until 1991 (active duty to 1987), and in foreign service all the way up to 2000. Not bad for an early 1950s design.
I understand what you are saying, but hear me out here: How does that affect a foreign sale, how would that make Grumman "to fat", "fat" enough to threaten any and all existing USN contracts?

The German deal called for Grumman manufacturing perhaps 50 initial units the rest of the order being built in Germany. The Canadian and Japanese orders are nearly identical. So it would be logical to presume that any one of them could trigger that warning off.

All of the developmental growth to the ST would in theory benefit greatly existing Tigers that were currently serving in the Fleet no?
THAT becomes a possible problem. This would tend to make the F-8 look like the wrong choice... and as we have discussed in other threads we know that the F-8 was not only a good aircraft but was purchased as much for it keeping Vought alive as a company.

Note I will be adding to this post a little later.

EDIT: The additions. page51image54108912
I will draw attention to the solid black portions of the drawing, in particular the wingtips. The 98L was what was to become the F-12. Adding to any of the possible production orders just the wingtips, which could be done to any existing F-11 in inventory increases the wing area to 313 sq. feet and lowers the wing loading to 83 and change at 26,000 pounds, at the max TO for the standard Tiger of 23,000 you are looking at 73... so she can launch off anything that can handle an A-4 including the H-8 CVS Essex.

The second drawing is of the AN-1, on that I want to draw attention to the F-11 folded up in the tube... they actually altered 6-7 just off the assembly line aircraft that way.. a large enough number that it is strongly likely that they test flew one to make sure it still would.
That also becomes a problem a couple plays ahead: She folds up to 10 feet across. F-8 is 23 folded, so 2 Tigers could fold up in the space taken up by a single F-8... And in the case of the Royal Navy it could directly replace both in terms of span and weight 2-1 SeaVixen.


But the wingtip thing is enough to be a threat to the Crusader and give smaller carriers a viable all weather mach 2, sparrow carrying air defense fighter in either single or 2 seater form... and that makes justifying bigger carriers more of a PITA to congress.

So yeah politics does suck.. I know I have worked in the field... and SuperTiger was murdered, murdered I tell you!!! LOL
 

Attachments

  • BoeingAN-1-2.jpg
    BoeingAN-1-2.jpg
    60.1 KB · Views: 8
Last edited:

SSgtC

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Jul 13, 2020
Messages
832
Reaction score
1,502
Something has been gnawing at the back of my brain for a few days now: The nagging suspicion that the SuperTiger was deliberately and with malice aforethought murdered and I am not sure where to explore best.

IF the USN does not let Grumman out of their promise to decline the German contract, I have no clue what the Germans are going to do if Starfighter is also not an option. Perhaps a mix of an F-8 variant and Buccaneer?

That promise is something that I missed when I first read the book.. I was scanning for numbers and different stuff so I am giving myself a tiny break for missing it.. is the basis for my suspicion on the murder of the ST. Parts of the timeline are somewhat unclear as to when the various nations that were on the verge of signing or had signed part of the deal and then backed out; but I wonder if it had been any nation would that same hint at looking to fat have come? You have to be fairly high up the food chain to talk directly to Mr. Grumman one would think, let alone put some pressure on him. This is going to be bugging me....
Personally, I think the Navy made the decision that the Crusader had more growth potential than the Tiger did and elected to kill the Super Tiger in the cradle. Is really hard to argue that they made the wrong call. The Crusader served with the fleet as a fighter through to 1976, in the photo recon role until 1991 (active duty to 1987), and in foreign service all the way up to 2000. Not bad for an early 1950s design.
I understand what you are saying, but hear me out here: How does that affect a foreign sale, how would that make Grumman "to fat", "fat" enough to threaten any and all existing USN contracts?

The German deal called for Grumman manufacturing perhaps 50 initial units the rest of the order being built in Germany. The Canadian and Japanese orders are nearly identical. So it would be logical to presume that any one of them could trigger that warning off.

All of the developmental growth to the ST would in theory benefit greatly existing Tigers that were currently serving in the Fleet no?
THAT becomes a possible problem. This would tend to make the F-8 look like the wrong choice... and as we have discussed in other threads we know that the F-8 was not only a good aircraft but was purchased as much for it keeping Vought alive as a company.

Note I will be adding to this post a little later.
Grumman was acutely aware that they were not the most popular company in Washington, that both McDonnell and Lockheed were preferred by law makers. If Grumman won the Super Tiger contract, it was highly unlikely that either the E-2 or A-6 would have been allowed to win their competitions and those planes would have been awarded to one of the other competitors. Because to Congress, "Grumman doesn't need that work, they just won this huge contract from Germany. But __________ in my district doesn't have that day contract. Let's award them the win even though the Grumman plane is better."

Politics suck.
 

bobtdwarf

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
204
Reaction score
395
Something has been gnawing at the back of my brain for a few days now: The nagging suspicion that the SuperTiger was deliberately and with malice aforethought murdered and I am not sure where to explore best.

IF the USN does not let Grumman out of their promise to decline the German contract, I have no clue what the Germans are going to do if Starfighter is also not an option. Perhaps a mix of an F-8 variant and Buccaneer?

That promise is something that I missed when I first read the book.. I was scanning for numbers and different stuff so I am giving myself a tiny break for missing it.. is the basis for my suspicion on the murder of the ST. Parts of the timeline are somewhat unclear as to when the various nations that were on the verge of signing or had signed part of the deal and then backed out; but I wonder if it had been any nation would that same hint at looking to fat have come? You have to be fairly high up the food chain to talk directly to Mr. Grumman one would think, let alone put some pressure on him. This is going to be bugging me....
Personally, I think the Navy made the decision that the Crusader had more growth potential than the Tiger did and elected to kill the Super Tiger in the cradle. Is really hard to argue that they made the wrong call. The Crusader served with the fleet as a fighter through to 1976, in the photo recon role until 1991 (active duty to 1987), and in foreign service all the way up to 2000. Not bad for an early 1950s design.
I understand what you are saying, but hear me out here: How does that affect a foreign sale, how would that make Grumman "to fat", "fat" enough to threaten any and all existing USN contracts?

The German deal called for Grumman manufacturing perhaps 50 initial units the rest of the order being built in Germany. The Canadian and Japanese orders are nearly identical. So it would be logical to presume that any one of them could trigger that warning off.

All of the developmental growth to the ST would in theory benefit greatly existing Tigers that were currently serving in the Fleet no?
THAT becomes a possible problem. This would tend to make the F-8 look like the wrong choice... and as we have discussed in other threads we know that the F-8 was not only a good aircraft but was purchased as much for it keeping Vought alive as a company.

Note I will be adding to this post a little later.
Grumman was acutely aware that they were not the most popular company in Washington, that both McDonnell and Lockheed were preferred by law makers. If Grumman won the Super Tiger contract, it was highly unlikely that either the E-2 or A-6 would have been allowed to win their competitions and those planes would have been awarded to one of the other competitors. Because to Congress, "Grumman doesn't need that work, they just won this huge contract from Germany. But __________ in my district doesn't have that day contract. Let's award them the win even though the Grumman plane is better."

Politics suck.
I think the Grumman not being a popular company thing is more a Cheney era thing... Dick Cheney was positively allergic to Grumman. But back in the late 50's? I don't think they had the same problem.
 

Hood

ACCESS: Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
2,845
Reaction score
3,534
As with recent posts of the CF-105's performance on this forum,

Wut ?
You were the one who posted the brochures!
I think it was RLBH who pointed out how the performance was very similar to that attained by the Convair F-106 and you mentioned all the missile/fire-control selection issues.
Sure it looked good but it was a flawed design, not saying it wouldn't have worked but it wouldn't have been a wonder fighter.

Grumman was acutely aware that they were not the most popular company in Washington, that both McDonnell and Lockheed were preferred by law makers.
What had Grumman done to deserve that? Most of the their programmes seem to have been very successful. Was it because they never penetrated the USAF hierarchy (the USMC/US Army OV-1 might have ruffled feathers)?
 

bobtdwarf

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
204
Reaction score
395
It's strange that every cancelled aircraft is tainted with the whiff of conspiracy. So much so that its cliché.
Well when you have things like the Lockheed bribery scandal and in particular to the SuperTiger labeling an aircraft that was almost 300 pounds lighter than the Tiger in current carrier service "to heavy for carrier service"... it tends to enhance that LOL!
 

SSgtC

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Jul 13, 2020
Messages
832
Reaction score
1,502
I think the Grumman not being a popular company thing is more a Cheney era thing... Dick Cheney was positively allergic to Grumman. But back in the late 50's? I don't think they had the same problem.

What had Grumman done to deserve that? Most of the their programmes seem to have been very successful. Was it because they never penetrated the USAF hierarchy (the USMC/US Army OV-1 might have ruffled feathers)?
Grumman had gotten kind of arrogant AIUI. Something they never really learned not to be. I also think some of it had to do with the fact that Lockheed and McDonnell knew how to play the political game and were just better at it.
 

bobtdwarf

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
204
Reaction score
395
I think the Grumman not being a popular company thing is more a Cheney era thing... Dick Cheney was positively allergic to Grumman. But back in the late 50's? I don't think they had the same problem.

What had Grumman done to deserve that? Most of the their programmes seem to have been very successful. Was it because they never penetrated the USAF hierarchy (the USMC/US Army OV-1 might have ruffled feathers)?
Grumman had gotten kind of arrogant AIUI. Something they never really learned not to be. I also think some of it had to do with the fact that Lockheed and McDonnell knew how to play the political game and were just better at it.
That would tend to support my hypothesis.. they were being trolled. Any of the foreign orders would have triggered the warn off, and Grumman's suspicion that they were being toyed with might have a basis in reality not just gut feeling. Will post another tidbit along with this.

page50image61766688

They were going to market the origami ST. So, let us say that CNO doesn't warn off Grumman and lets the sales go through (This is a potential suspect as he would have eyes on all possible programs but could be someone else); this kind of system would have some appeal to the Germans since as I recall they may have done something similar with the F-104.. I have a vague memory of a video of a Starfighter being "yeeted" like this, but am fuzzy on it... Edit: Though a folding wing is not shown in the illustration this just demands nay screams for one and to be put on a train or a covered trailer

This would give the USMC a platform to compare to the F-8 and start screaming for as Vietnam starts heating up... all of the improvements made to the ST including the origami folding could be done to any long nose F-11, including the ones that were mostly in storage in the mid '60s allowing you to double up a Marine squadron of F-8s in the same hangar space with an aircraft that is a much better CAS platform and a near equal gunfighter... Marines love raining "hate and discontent" on the heads of people shooting at fellow Marines and they are super good at being REALLY annoying in yelling for things that help them do that... see the amount of money poured into the F-8 to add A2G to it because of the Corps. I would bet the conversion costs of the program would be less than the development costs of the F-8 subtype that I can't remember the designator of.
 
Last edited:

Archibald

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
7,731
Reaction score
6,957
You were the one who posted the brochures!
I think it was RLBH who pointed out how the performance was very similar to that attained by the Convair F-106 and you mentioned all the missile/fire-control selection issues.
Sure it looked good but it was a flawed design, not saying it wouldn't have worked but it wouldn't have been a wonder fighter.

Ah, I see what you mean now. Yeah, I love the Arrow but not to the point of losing my lucidity over it, I mean, Randall Withcomb really annoyed me back in 2002-2006 when I red some of his stuff on the Internet and nearly fell for it... then I decided to make my own research.

Took a very long time to get out of the annoying myth blown out of proportion (in that regard, I think Palmiro Campagna is doing an honest job, but it nonethless needs to be balanced by other stuff)
- but finding those NRC documents was pretty exciting, NOT become they made the Arrow a SUPER-DUPER aircraft; rather, to ground it in truth and real-world, rock-solid numbers.
Now I have a clue of what this aircraft could do, and what it could not. Related to a F-106, its best aguments were: 2-seats, 2-engines. F-101B however was already there...
 
Last edited:

bobtdwarf

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
204
Reaction score
395
I would bet the conversion costs of the program would be less than the development costs of the F-8 subtype that I can't remember the designator of.
The first model to have air to ground capability was the F8U-2NE (F-8E). The earlier models were backfitted with hardpoints later on
thanks a ton!

I have a photographic memory but sadly they stopped making film for it years ago...
 

Siberia

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Aug 24, 2012
Messages
52
Reaction score
29
Do people think that if the Germans, and other European countries, had been offered an aircraft that was broadly comparable to the F-4 which first flew in say 1956 and was on track to be introduced in late 1959 or 1960 they might have been interested, or would it be too much aircraft? A more expensive purchase price can be dealt with via low/no-interest loans or similar but higher running costs could be a problem.
 
Last edited:

bobtdwarf

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
204
Reaction score
395
Do people think that if the Germans, and other European countries, had been offered an aircraft that was broadly comparable to the F-4 which first flew in say 1956 and was on track to be introduced in late 1959 or 1960 they might have been interested, or would it be too much aircraft? A more expensive purchase price can be dealt with via low/no-interest loans or similar but higher running costs could be a problem.
they could have been offered the F-4, but they were twice the price, so half the numbers could be acquired.
 

bobtdwarf

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
204
Reaction score
395
I posted earlier in the thread about the navy making Grumman promise to NOT take the German order... came across this in earlier in the same book screen-shot-2020-04-30-at-4-26-22-pm-png.631876
The part where Admiral Schoecher WANTS them to win the German order to show that the navy can build a great fighter...

Anyone else find that combo a bit "sketchy"

Posting here to keep the two bits of data together.
 
Last edited:

Siberia

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Aug 24, 2012
Messages
52
Reaction score
29
They could have been offered the F-4, but they were twice the price, so half the numbers could be acquired.
Well that was why I mentioned low/no interest loans, much like financing a car it allows you spread the payments out over say five or ten years taking some of the sting out of the price. You can't however do that with running costs hence the question of whether it would be a deal killer or not.
 

bobtdwarf

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
204
Reaction score
395
They could have been offered the F-4, but they were twice the price, so half the numbers could be acquired.
Well that was why I mentioned low/no interest loans, much like financing a car it allows you spread the payments out over say five or ten years taking some of the sting out of the price. You can't however do that with running costs hence the question of whether it would be a deal killer or not.
as I understand it US MAP money was involved already so... the "low cost/no cost" is kind of built in
 

Pioneer

Seek out and close with the enemy
Senior Member
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
2,245
Reaction score
794
A land-based Crusader with a J79 would indeed no longer need a VI wing - as the engine is not only shorter, but the nozzle won't hit a flight deck at low speed and high AoA anymore.

Problem: these two modifications would cost Germany an arm and a leg. "Better is the ennemy of good" sometimes.

Maybe the V.I wing mechanism could be locked in place or removed altogether without further modifications ?
As in the LTV V-1000 some years later Archibald?

Regards
Pioneer
 

Archibald

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
7,731
Reaction score
6,957
Yep except I learned on this forum that the V-1000 kept the V.I wing, don't ask me why... (or maybe I should check the thread again).
 
Last edited:

Pioneer

Seek out and close with the enemy
Senior Member
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
2,245
Reaction score
794
Yep except I learned on this forum that the V-1000 kept the V.I wing, don't ask me why... (or maybe I should check the thread again).
Nothing wrong with revisiting the amazing topics/post on this forum, I often learn more on the second read....
Please let us know what you assertain as a result mate.

Regards
Pioneer
 
Top