Posted on 08/23/2018 7:24:05 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
The controversy swirling around the F-35 joint strike fighter echoes previous battles fought over aircraft tasked with serving more than one master. Perhaps the central question in today’s debate is whether a single airplane designed to perform many missions adequately is a better and truly more affordable choice than several airplanes, each designed to perform a single mission flawlessly. In 1968, the Navy had an unequivocal answer: No. But were they right?
In the early 1960s both the Navy and the Air Force were shopping for new combat aircraft. The Navy needed a carrier-based interceptor capable of engaging Soviet bombers hundreds of miles away, before they could launch long-range anti-ship missiles; the Air Force required a supersonic, ground-hugging penetrator that could duck in under enemy radar and dodge surface-to-air missiles.
Traditionally, each service developed its own aircraft to meet its specific requirements. But in early 1961, newly appointed Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara came up with a scheme to save millions of dollars by using a common airframe for the two very different missions. He was determined to check the escalating costs of ever-more-sophisticated weapons systems. The result was a warplane that neither service particularly wanted, one branded by critics as a “flying Edsel.” Former test pilot George Marrett remembers it simply as “the worst aircraft I had ever flown.”
Read more at https://www.airspacemag.com/military-aviation/13_sep2018-cancelled-f111b-1-180969916/#vdR22KjjbPjHFcmX.99
(Excerpt) Read more at airspacemag.com ...
That’s not really true. As the Aussies discovered, the FB-111 proved to be a very effective maritime bomber/attack aircraft. Moreover, the electronic warfare variant, the EF-111 Raven was a superb electronic warfare aircraft capable of shutting down entire air defense networks (which it did on more than one occasion).
Yes they were.
And the reason they were able to do that, was that the FB’s from the 48th TFW were escorted by a single EF-111 Raven, probably the very best electronic warfare aircraft of all time.
You are correct sir. One aircraft never returned. They flew out of Lakenheath. I had been in the Lakenheath tower in 1983. I started working in the Tower at Travis, in 1984. They had the missing man formation at Travis, while I was the supervisor on duty in the tower. It was impressive.
There were carriers involved in the strike. A-6s and A-7s hit other targets.
The stories I've heard implied that it was too much mass x decel (aka force) for the ship to handle, routinely. (Full disclosure, this is likely just rumor, so it needs to be verified by someone who actually knows.)
The rear wheel base looks a bit squirrelly for a carrier landing.
“The F-35 scares me because it too is trying to be the everything fighter also. I pray it is not another F-111.”
The F-35A, B, and C variants are really not the same airplane. They were supposed to be, but they are actually each mostly unique platforms. Hence, the staggering cost of development. They will turn out to be good Strike Fighters for each service (USAF/USMC/USN). Keeping in mind that they are not designed to be Air Superiority platforms. We need the F-22 back in production for that...
“The F-111 was supposed to be the do everything fighter for all the services, but didn’t do any one thing in a superior manner. “
Actually, there was one thing it could do better than anything else: Deliver nuclear weapons flying 500mph only 50 feet off the ground.
I had a buddy who was an F-111 pilot and on several occasions he mentioned that "there had never been a successful ejection" from the F-111E (I believe). That was the model where the entire front of the aircraft was supposed to separate.
“The rear wheel base looks a bit squirrelly for a carrier landing.”
The mains were beefy, realllly beefy, just for carrier landings.
The F-111 had lots of ejections. It had multiple aircraft with ejections while I was at Lakenheath. All of them were successful.
F-111 at 47k lbs and the F-14 at 43k lbs. Not much difference.
The Navy hated the F-111 from the beginning. The F-14 design came later and was a better design for intercept missions the carrier needed.
Were they the model where the entire front of the aircraft separated?
All F-111 models had a ejectable crew capsule. None had ejection seats.
Dateline “ September 2018. “
The F-111 is so fast it can arrive in the future.
J/k
5.56mm
Agree with everything you say, my FRiend; I will mention, however, those are empty weights. The significant differences are more evident with loaded weights.
Wasn't that part of the myth to keep people thinking it was a dog, because it's terrain following radar worked and you might as well play psych ops w/ the North Vietnamese and the Ruskies?
They were “state of the art” when I was in AFROTC. I remember going up to Plattsburg to sit in them. I thought they were pretty cool at the time.
But I also thought disco was cool too.
You’re right, 82k (F-111) vs 62k (F-14). Wow. The F-111 was a real heavy lifter.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.