Joint Strike Fighter = Thunderchief II?

Air Power Australia ^ | November 2004 | Dr. Carlo Kopp

[myknowledge]

The new Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program is often compared to the early nineteen sixties Tactical Fighter eXperimental (TFX/F-111) program, reflecting the multi-service structure of both programs. In concept and sizing, however, the JSF is very much closer to another early nineteen sixties tactical fighter, the Republic AP-63 series F-105 Thunderchief.

The F-105 was the workhorse of the Vietnam air war, especially the 1964-1968 Rolling Thunder bombing campaign. Affectionately known as the Lead Sled, Super Hog, Ultra Hog, Iron Butterfly and famously Thud, the F-105A first flew in 1955, and was designed by Republic's legendary Alexander Kartvelli to be a highly survivable strike oriented tactical fighter, with a secondary air to air capability, primarily for self defence. The aircraft was to have significantly better combat radius than previous USAF jet fighters, and in line with the penetration paradigm of the day, very high speed.

The resulting F-105 series was a fighter which is remarkably close to the current JSF in most important cardinal parameters.

Both the F-105 and JSF are large single seat single engine strike fighters, using the most powerful engine of the era (J75 vs F135/F136), with empty weights in the 27,000 lb class, and wingspans almost identical at 35 feet. Both carry internal weapon bays, and multiple external hardpoints for drop tanks and weapons. Both were intended to achieve combat radii in the 400 nautical mile class. Neither have by the standards of their respective periods high thrust/weight ratio or energy manoeuvre capability, favoured for air superiority fighters and interceptors.

Both the F-105 and JSF were crafted around the dominant penetration paradigm of their respective periods. The F-105 was built to use speed to penetrate defences, and like the F-111 was designed to penetrate and egress at very low altitudes, using terrain masking and clutter to defeat opposing radar systems. The JSF is being built to penetrate at medium to lower altitudes using X-band stealth to defeat engagement radars and radar guided SAM seekers. While they differ in the substance of their penetration technique, they share the common feature of using the best technique of their respective eras.

The Joint Strike Fighter best compares in its roles and missions, sizing and relative capabilities to the Republic F-105D Thunderchief, the workhorse of the US bombing effort during the Vietnam conflict. What is remarkable is the extent to which a similar roles/missions requirement, defined almost four decades later, produced a combat aircraft of nearly identical size and weight. Like the F-105, the JSF is not designed to be a top end air superiority fighter, but is designed with a robust self defence capability.

The avionics in both aircraft represent the latest technology of their respective periods. The F-105's ASG-19 Thunderstick I/II system was tightly integrated with the NASARR multimode radar, as is the JSF's ICP package and APG-81 radar. Both radars are designs biased toward air-ground modes, but with respectable air-intercept capabilities for their periods.

The definitive F-105D, of which only 610 were built by 1964 due to higher than hoped for costs, could carry up to 2,500 lb in its internal bomb bay, and external stores on two 3,000 lb inboard pylons, two 3,000 lb outboard pylons and a 4,500 lb centreline pylon, for a total of 12,000 lb. The JSF carries a 2,500 lb guided bomb in either fuselage bay, up to 5,000 lb on a pair of inboard pylons, and 2,500 lb on a pair of outboard main pylons, with a 1,000 lb centreline pylon.

The F-105D fleet was thrown into the meatgrinder of the NVA air defence system, then the most formidable in existence as the SovBloc pushed their latest SAMs, radars and MiG-21 Fishbeds into the theatre. Between 1965 and 1970 no less than 334 fell to enemy defences - 312 to SAM/AAA - not a bad figure in terms of sorties flown and the density of defences in theatre. Despite the bad press attached to the F-105, it was a rugged high performance aircraft capable of taking a lot of punishment.

The typical configuration for strike sorties was a payload of 6 to 8 750 lb M117 dumb bombs (4,500 lb to 6,000 lb), with two external 450 USG tanks. For shorter ranging CAS/BAI tasks, up to 12 M117 or 9,000 lb were carried. These payloads are very similar to the nominal internal/external payloads of the JSF. Typical fuel for an F-105D using internal tanks, a bomb bay tank and two 450 USG tanks was 16,000 lb - very close to the internal fuel of a JSF.

Early F-105 sorties were flown in a self escort configuration, armed with an internal 20 mm gun and an external AIM-9B missile, paired with an EWSP pod, on outboard pylons. The NVAF quickly learned that early engagement of the F-105 strike packages forced them to jettison bombs to achieve viable performance to defend themselves or evade attack, and very early the F-105s were supported by F-4C Phantom CAPs to keep the MiGs clear of the strike packages. A later tactic saw F-4C/D Phantoms interspersed with F-105s to effect defacto escort support. Most sources claim 22 F-105s lost to MiGs for 27.5 MiGs shot down by the F-105s, or an exchange rate of 1.25:1 in close air combat.

The F-105 experience presents an interesting case study of self escorting strike fighter operations, and the utility of a strike optimised tactical fighter in air combat. Two factors make this experience important. The F-105D/F and MiG-21 Fishbed had defacto parity in radar/missile performance with the MiG doing better in turn/climb performance, and the extended duration of the campaign made for a large number of statistically valuable repeat engagements.

This is especially relevant for the Australian DoD which intends to fly self escorted F/A-18As and later JSFs into a Sukhoi Su-30 rich regional environment. For the non-stealthy F/A-18A the reality is that an inbound Sukhoi will force an F/A-18A to jettison stores to achieve viable air combat performance to even survive the engagement - unlike an F-105D evading a MiG-21PF, the F/A-18 family does not have a speed/endurance advantage to play against the Sukhoi. For the JSF, which has roughly parity in radar performance against better Su-30 variants, and parity in energy performance against older Su-27SK configurations, it puts all of the survivability eggs into the stealth basket.

There is another interesting parallel in the F-105/F-4 experience, which is that the F-4 had a significant advantage in radar/missile range and energy performance. This parallels the superior stealth, radar, missile kinematic and energy performance advantages held by the F-22A, intended to escort the JSF in US Air Force service.

While the JSF and F-105 are separated by almost half a century in technology, they occupy almost identical niches in size and intended role optimisations. The F-105 was clearly an outstanding success in its primary role of strike/interdiction and close support, but was much less successful in air combat. The lesson in this for future JSF users is a simple one - the JSF is likely to be highly effective in its primary battlefield interdiction / close air support role but less likely to be successful in air combat, as its basic aerodynamic performance is close to parity with the most likely adversary types - advanced Su-30 variants. The decisive factor for the JSF in this game will be its limited stealth performance against the full spectrum of opposing radar systems, especially long range lower band surveillance radars used to guide Sukhoi intercepts.

The Australian DoD's idea of using the reduced stealth export JSF as an F-22A substitute courageously defies historical experience in the use of strike optimised tactical fighters in air combat. It will inevitably attract criticism of the JSF's limited air combat performance rather than criticism of the intention to use the JSF outside of its design optimal roles. The JSF is no more an F-22A, than the F-105D was an F-4C.

[myknowledge]

To be honest, why would the military brass want preference for a reincarnation of the Generation 2 F-105 Thud instead of a continuation of the Generation 4 F-15 Eagle?

Is it because they want the Lightning II to be used as a sacrificial lamb for young U.S. pilots to be killed in?

While I myself am a fan of military aviation, I cannot fathom why the brass, or the decision makers up on the Hill want to field the F-35 Lightning II as a substitute for her larger sister, the F-22 Raptor?

Read through the article and you'll see the Thud-Lightning II connection.

[chopperman]

The 105 was a maintenance headache.

[denydenydeny]

Somewhere, Pukin Dog is smiling.

[Yo-Yo]

That is an old article from 2005, and was discussed way back then.

Nobody, not even Gates, is claiming that the F-35 is a substitute for the F-22. The F-35 is a replacement for the F-15, which itself was more or less a replacement for the Thud.

The F-22 falls into the F-15 and F-4 lineage.

The orignal and most optimistic plans called for 350+ F-22s and 3,500 F-35s. Still expect a 10 to 1 buy ratio of F-22 to F-35, just the numbers will be way down from 1980’s projections.

Australia made a mistake, IMO, by purchasing the E/A-18F as a stopgap to replace their retiring F-111C/Gs until the F-35 is online.

What they should have bought was the F-15E, that is much closer to the range, speed, and payload of the F-111 for the maritime interdiction role than the F/A-18F ever will be, or the F-35A will be for that matter.

Ideally, Australia could use the range and supercruise of the F-22, given the amount of territory the RAAF has to cover. But that ain’t never gonna happen.

[Yo-Yo]

Oops! Major correction:The F-35 is a replacement for the F-15 F-16, which itself was more or less a replacement for the Thud.

[GBA]

Neither have by the standards of their respective periods high thrust/weight ratio or energy manoeuvre capability, favoured for air superiority fighters and interceptors.

Telling quote for all those who think the F-35 is a fighter, though stripped down with only a few missiles, it would be more formidable against it's threats than the F-105 was to the MiGs in its day.

Still, it could be worse. The better aircraft won in the JSF competition. We could have gotten this...thing, affectionately known as "the Monica":

[ak267]

The F105???

The “lead sled”
The “Thud”
“SAM bait”

[ApplegateRanch]

Is that an engine air intake, or is it just happy to be on the ground?

[GBA]

Yes, it is.

[immadashell]

Read Boyd - The Fighter Pilot Who Changed the Art of War by Robert Coram. The Thud was a bomber not a fighter.

[myknowledge]

I know. I brought up this article because the statements in this article come close to paralleling that of the decision makers up in the Hill favoring the F-35 instead, because they think it's a multi-role fighter rolled into one plane when it is actually just suited to A2G, with limited A2A. Ideally, Australia could use the range and supercruise of the F-22, given the amount of territory the RAAF has to cover. But that ain’t never gonna happen. Unless the Obey Amendment is repealed.

[GBA]

True, but it did shoot down 25 MiGs, almost all with cannon fire.

[LuvFreeRepublic]

I am so glad I saw this post. Not that I know anything about planes, I am only the Colonel's daughter, but I have friends who will be interested in the article and the comments. My dad and some of my FaceBook friends were Thud pilots and were part of the Rolling Thunder campaign. In addition, they know active AF pilots and are familiar with the capabilities and limitations of the F-22 and F35. I think they may enjoy reading the comments.

[FlyVet]

Survivable unless it took a hit in the hydraulics. From what I remember reading in the book Thud Ridge, the 105 had a non-redundant hydraulic system. If it took a hit in a hydraulic line, the pilot had to dash for the sea, hoping that he got out of enemy territory before he lost hydraulic pressure. He couldn't control the plane at that point, and had to eject.

But it was very fast at low level. I used to hear it could outrun an F-15 down low.

[GBA]

Unlike the F-15, with those small wings the F-105 probably had a decent ride down low. On the other hand, those little wings probably gave it the maneuverability of a dump truck.

[LuvFreeRepublic]

Thud Ridge is an excellent book. Another one I would recommend is “When Thunder Rolled” by Ed Rasimus. It is a first hand account of what it was like to be a Thud pilot. Thud pilots are true heroes. In addition, Craig Baker's F-105 site is full of really good information related to the Thud, its pilots and the missions.

http://www.burrusspta.org/thud.html

One thing is certain, the Thud did what my dad needed it to do and it brought him home. Go Thud Go!

[CaptRon]

Aside from the C-3 (CH-48?, Dakota?), the F-111 was the most beuatiful bird ever built. And much malinged, IMHO. (No flames please, not a pilot, just an aviation fan).

[LuvFreeRepublic]

Hi CaptRon, I know someone who is well versed in the subject of aviation and he shares your view of the F-111. Unfortunately he is not a Freeper so if you get flamed, he can't help you.

[FlyVet]

The Learning Channel had a documentary on the -100 series planes that was interesting. The high wing loading made them very fast in a straight line, but right, not much maneuverability.

As a young airman in the early 80's, a few Guard or Reserve 105s landed at Holloman AFB now and then. I remember how hard they'd hit the runway, almost as if they were landing on an aircraft carrier.

I also remember that the Luftwaffe flew the F-104 well into the 80's. Their plan of attack was fast and at low level, and the 104 was also very fast on the deck with those tiny wings.

They would practice barrel-rolling over the ridges, because the maneuver would help them stay down below radar. Now that's some ballsy pilots.

[Oztrich Boy]

Boeing had retired all their experienced designers and had kindergartners design the F-32.

[GBA]

The F-105 was one tough airplane and those men like your dad who flew her are my heroes. I can't imagine their courage, same for the F-100 pilots and all who flew wild weasel missions. Complete insanity and heroics.

[LuvFreeRepublic]

Those who flew the wild weasel missions were incredible heroes. Imagine acting like a decoy so the SAMs could get you in their sites. Their mission, find the SAMs and take them out so the strike force could get the job done. I was outraged when I found out that the pilots couldn't take the SAM sites out while they were being constructed. They had to wait until they were firing on our pilots. Same with the Migs. They could be sitting all lined up on a runway, but they couldn't be taken out until they were airborne and going after our pilots. Uh-oh, I am starting to rant. Better go now or it could get ugly. Damn the idiots that made the decisions.

[Nuc1]

While I myself am a fan of military aviation, I cannot fathom why the brass, or the decision makers up on the Hill want to field the F-35 Lightning II as a substitute for her larger sister, the F-22 Raptor?

Perhaps they a better plane than the F-22 gittin ready to go?

[SwampFoxOfVa]

The name of the author of “Thud Ridge” escapes me. but he wrote another book about Thuds and their drivers called “Going Downtown” which was about the strafing incident in Haiphong harbor and the subsequent events including the Court Martial of the author. It is worth the read if you can find the book.

SF

[JasonC]

More than half of the North Vietnamese MiGs were antique MiG-17s, not 21s.

And over 300 aircraft lost to ground fire is no record to emulate...

[LuvFreeRepublic]

The author for “Thud Ridge” and “Going Downtown” is Colonel Jack Broughton. Both were excellent books. I found the books on my dad’s book shelf. :)

[GBA]

That’s a rant I say myself, and more frequently these days. What pisses me off is that we didn’t learn a thing, or if we did, we are ignoring what we learned and seem to be repeating history...I keep hoping I’m wrong...We’ve lost far too many heroes.

[BIGLOOK]

Thud/JSF comparison......

Ping

[GBA]

And over 300 aircraft lost to ground fire is no record to emulate...

Yes, quite right. Over 300 lost out of the slightly over 800 built...and lots of good men killed or taken prisoner. High price to pay for a lesson we didn't learn.

[tanknetter]

The lesson in this for future JSF users is a simple one - the JSF is likely to be highly effective in its primary battlefield interdiction / close air support role but less likely to be successful in air combat, as its basic aerodynamic performance is close to parity with the most likely adversary types - advanced Su-30 variants. The decisive factor for the JSF in this game will be its limited stealth performance against the full spectrum of opposing radar systems, especially long range lower band surveillance radars used to guide Sukhoi intercepts.

The real question from an A2A perspective is whether the F-35 will remain undetected long enough to get within AIM-120 range. There was a great quote by an F-22 pilot about taking out F-15s in turkey-shoot fashion during wargames ... to paraphrase "We see them; they never see us. At least they don't die stressed".

[xone]

And over 300 aircraft lost to ground fire is no record to emulate...

It's a different world now.

[LuvFreeRepublic]

My understanding of the BS that occurred was that the brass cherry picked the targets and prevented our Air Force from getting the job done. They didn't want to piss off China and Russia. As a result, pilots were lost and troops and supplies moved south. How many less names would be on The Wall if the Thud pilots didn't have both hands tied behind their backs? Our pilots faced incredible odds, especially when their missions took them to the infamous Route Pack Six, down the ridge, to Hanoi. The most heavily defend target in history. Yes the losses were high due to the Flack. These losses should have never happened and neither should we have had the losses we incurred in the south.

Here is a link to an article that I believe I got off FreeRepublic a while back. It is a very good analysis of why the greatest military in the world suffers needless losses. We, who get it, must never waiver from supporting our military and voicing our objections to decisions that hamper our military’s ability to get the job done.

http://www.securityaffairs.org/issues/2009/16/peters.php

[alfa6]

Here ya go mate

And the 'vark performing the "party trick"\

Thanks for the ping BIGLOOK

Regards

alfa6 ;>}

[ASOC]

Would you ask your dad if he flew with Glen “Wimpy” Peake - WBFP (Worlds best fighter pilot)

Wimpy was one of my COs at Nellis - what a guy! Hell of a Thud driver as well.

[LuvFreeRepublic]

No my dad doesn't remember Glen “Wimpy” Peake, but it has been a long time. My dad was at Korat July 67 - May 68. Do you know what base Peake was at or the time frame?

[ASOC]

Wimpy was one of the original Red River Rats, pulling 2 (and maybe 3) tours out of Thailand - don't know if it was Takhli or NKP.

One of his most famous stories was being chased by MiGs so he “blew down the ‘main drag’ of Hanoi at over a grand” sucking every piece of glass in downtown out into the street.... he always laughed maniacally while he told the story.

He was flying at Nellis in the early 70s as part of the Tactical Electronic Warfare Training Sqdn (TEWTS) - and scaring the poop out of us on the ground.

Last I saw he was heading out of the main gate on his hog, girlfriend sitting behind him. I've not seen any obits, so was wondering if your dad had heard anything.

[LuvFreeRepublic]

I check with a few Facebook friends of mine. One is director of the River Rats foundation. I will see what I can find out. Later.

[ASOC]

THanks so much, I’ve always wondered if he opened a bar in Bakersfield or Phucat... or what happened.

[PIF]

Just like the Messiah’s ROIs for US ground forces in Afganistan...

[PIF]

Yes indeedy, the Messiah by killing the F22 has ensured that any USAF plane will follow the Thuds to the ground or remain hanger bound.

[xone]

any USAF plane

I call BS on this statement. There are plenty of Force pilots who will get it done through the judicious use of tactics and balls. 0bama/democrats who hate America have made it harder to win, but we will despite their efforts.

[PIF]

Good luck with that against over welming numbers of 5th & 6th gen airframes from Rusia, China, and India.

[xone]

against over welming numbers of 5th & 6th gen airframes from Rusia, China, and India.

Thanks to your boy luck may be all we have by then as I look out now and see all these aircraft in the sky now? No. Your man won't be in charge forever, the Russkies and the ChiComs better get crackin' if your hoped for scenario is to occur.

[Chief901]

I was in a Navy Squadron (1967-68) that had three RA5C Vigilantes that were used for high-altitude Recon. At Night take-offs they were the most beautiful thing you have ever seen. IMHO this is the most beautiful plane.

http://www.paxmuseum.com/a5/ra5c.htm
Check-out the altitude record.

[Rannug]

As an aside, the first mig killed in Nam was by two propeller driven planes, A1Skyraider I believe. The mig just could not stand up to twelve .50s at one time.

[PIF]

Hey! The Messiah ain’t my boy! Nor my boytoy!

It is just the reality of numbers. The F22 (the few we have) even at 100:1 cannot match the numbers of PAC’s, Flankers, etc which will be thrown against them. Which is why we need all 750 as originally planned. Worse, the US is not even currently researching a 6th gen fighter, while the other guys are actively pursuing various concepts.

Further, the Olby Admendment need to be repealed so we can sell F22s to Israel, Japan and Austraila/New Zealand.

[myknowledge]

A-1H Skyraider. IIRC, it had 4 x 20mm cannon. VPAF MiG-17. The feared dogfighter of the skies over North Vietnam.

[Rannug]

I really didn’t think that looked like the right plane. I remember reading that both pilots opened up with six .50s each, and took the mig down. Some things about getting old are nice, but...........

[myknowledge]

The A-1H Skyraiders (nicknamed Spads) had four 20mm cannon each, not the six .50 MGs that the WWII era P-51D Mustang had. Anyway, do you think the Lightning II is basically a reincarnation of the Thud? I think yes.

[Rannug]

I am really not well enough informed to make a decision on that. I spent my time there with the leaches and buff shit.