Us Navy F111B?

[MAKO69 186]

I think its safe to say the Airforce got a great tactical bomber and the Navy got a great fleet defender out of the F-111B fiasco. I sure would'nt want an F-111B protecting me.

[charlielima 328]

I think its safe to say the Airforce got a great tactical bomber and the Navy got a great fleet defender out of the F-111B fiasco. I sure would'nt want an F-111B protecting me.

 

Most true Mako. Varks and Switchblades are da kine. There is at least 5 other Aircraft I would like to see on our sim before we celebrate a McNamara / DOD failure / F-111B.

:ph34r: CL

[+Julhelm 266]

It'd be interesting to have the various contenders for VFX flyable ingame. For instance Grummans single-seat fixed-wing Tomcat or GD's downscaled swingwing. Or Voughts swingwing and NAA's ogival wing twinseater.

[Lexx_Luthor 57]

I've been thinking of using F-111 as SAC penetration fighter in the Siberian Sky campaign, as a low cost and more common alternative to F-12 and F-108. To get it into service faster, maybe use two J-75s?

 

For a generation earlier, F-105 would make effective and faster escort fighter than F-101, at least until F-110 arrives. I've pretty much decided to use "F-110" instead of F-4 (LeMay for president, McNamara eternally tenured as university professor, etc...) B-58 could also be used until F-12 becomes available. What would that be called...FB-58?

[kct 5]

I've been thinking of using F-111 as SAC penetration fighter in the Siberian Sky campaign, as a low cost and more common alternative to F-12 and F-108. To get it into service faster, maybe use two J-75s?

 

For a generation earlier, F-105 would make effective and faster escort fighter than F-101, at least until F-110 arrives. I've pretty much decided to use "F-110" instead of F-4 (LeMay for president, McNamara eternally tenured as university professor, etc...) B-58 could also be used until F-12 becomes available. What would that be called...FB-58?

 

The F-111A would be a nice idea for the SAC, some writings in Wikipedia suggested that the internal weapons bay of the aircraft would be used to carry...Falcons, until it is suggested that they are no use against hard-turning MiGs (at least they stay on until the Six went away). Still, it was meant with some limited air-to-air capacity in mind, although they would find trouble against hard-turning MiGs (not a problem if it is a long-ranged battle). Some proposals would involve shoehorning hardware from either projects (F-12 and F-108) into the F-111 (especially the radar, which was somewhat true to an extent), so it is kind of moot that it can happen.

 

FB designations would usually refer to a fighter-bomber that become an outright bomber of sorts (usually for a bomber derived from a fighter, much like the FB-111 or the rumoured FB-22, although someone or two can correct me if I got it wrong), although to probably convince the government, a less complex designation could be used (something like what the Super Hornet is to the Hornet in terms of designation), to sell the program.

 

I would love to see how you work it out (been doing the classical side of things now, instead of modern).

Edited October 16, 2008 by kct

[Lexx_Luthor 57]

FB...well the one Ussian example I can think of is A-20 bomber turning P-70 night interceptor. So a B-58 fitted with the F-12 stuff mighta coulda shoulda woulda be called a new fighter name. Say, F-109 which according to Baugher was a name probably never used by USAF.

 

F-109 ~> http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/f109.html

 

 

 

kct::

Falcons, until it is suggested that they are no use against hard-turning MiGs

AIM-26, AIM-47, even AIM-9

 

MiGs like Zeros turn well at low speeds.

 

Forget the MiGs, and Vietnam. I know what you are thinking. Just let them go.

 

Czech out the PVO starting lineup for 1960s.

 

Nothing turns "hard" -- as in low turnrates -- at high altitude if its moving very fast. Shucks, if they are forced to turn to avoid missile attack, they lose their one and only chance at their supersonic target.

[kct 5]

True, but I was saying that the Vark can carry air-to-air missiles inside the weapons bay, provided that it got a radar good enough to do it (something like the F-111B's, which end up being the precursor to the AWG-9 in the Tomcats). A loadout of 6 or so Nuclear Falcons?

Edited October 16, 2008 by kct

[Lexx_Luthor 57]

Yeah, something like that. And maybe a Sidewinder or two on the wings or someplace.

[+Spectre_USA 7]

The F-111F's did carry 9L's, I helped wire a few test ones with a cool switch in the WSO's upper right panel area.

 

Loaded a few test ones, and plenty of ACMI pods, which used the AIM-9 rails.

 

Not at all out of the question, as the rear aspects and hardware were already there...

[Lexx_Luthor 57]

Hey thanks Spectre. That is really AWSIM to hear stuff like this.

 

 

mmm, here is Baugher on 111A::

The APQ-113 forward-looking attack radar was a large liquid-cooled set that operates in the J-band (16-16.4 GHz). It was used by the navigator sitting in the right hand seat for navigation, air/ground ranging and weapons delivery. It could also be used in the air-to-air mode in conjunction with the 20-mm M61A1 cannon or Sidewinder missiles, although the air-to-air role was not the primary mission of the F-111A.

 

~ http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/f111_1.html

I should look at that dedicated 111 website.

[+Spectre_USA 7]

They tried the M61a1 20mm gatling in the bay of the "D" models for a bit, but not much came of it.

 

I am pretty sure they preferred the AIM-9's, if cornered, as they usual response was to get in the weeds and light the burners, as few could catch it.

 

For ground strafing, it did not pack enough punch, nor could the angle be such to facilitate low angle gun runs. The GePod-30 was contemplated but

never even tested, that I am aware of...

[kct 5]

Hmmm, someone did an RF-111G mod, which is an air-to-air Vark. However, the .lods are based on the F-111F, which means that there is a Pave Tack on the fuselage.

 

At least, this is the loadout I managed to come up with:

 

2 x Sidewinders

4 x Sparrows

2 x Falcon

[+Typhoid 231]

Hmmm, someone did an RF-111G mod, which is an air-to-air Vark. However, the .lods are based on the F-111F, which means that there is a Pave Tack on the fuselage.

 

At least, this is the loadout I managed to come up with:

 

2 x Sidewinders

4 x Sparrows

2 x Falcon

 

The F-111B was being designed to carry and shoot what became the Phoenix. So an F-111B model should have six Phoenix.

[kct 5]

That was for the fictional air-to-air F-111 for Lexx's setting, although six Phoenixes are fine too (provided that Lexx would have a way for them to exist).

[fallenphoenix1986 603]

Saw something a while back, don't remember where, about an Australian program to equip their 111's for A2A as a stop gap before signing a deal for te F-35/F-22. Bassically the idea involved a new radar and about 10 Amraams.

 

Craig

[Southernap 1]

Charlie Lima,

 

The long range shore base naval bomber with in the US Navy died with the P6M Seamaster program. It was realized that it could be done cheaper, faster, quicker by either carrier based aviation or by the oncoming Polaris missile system. To give the Navy credit though it really worked hard to make the last seaplane work about 8 years after the concept was proven to be obsolete.

[WarlordATF 1]

I have been having fun with my F-111B Stand-in, I based its radar on the F-14As but weaker and made a copy of the AIM-54A and tweaked the numbers a little to simulate a prototype missile and named it AIM-54 since the AIM-54A Phoenix was not in service when the F-111B was being tested, but i bet a few existed. Only problem so far is i cant get the Tailhook to work right. Its not catching the wire and the AI crashes it into the deck. Its still been fun to play with though.

 

 

EDIT: I think the F-111B would have been very effective in the cold war, If they could have reduced the weight/maintence.

 

The Navy liked to keep aircraft in the air at all times for fleet defense anyway so F-111Bs would be on-duty round the clock which would have made it a maintence nightmare.However, The AIM-54 and Radar at that time would have been a major advantage because targets could be knocked out before ever becoming a threat to the fleet. 4 on the Wings and 2 in the bay, even with a 50% success rate, a 4 ship can destroy a squadron at 30+ miles. Then don't forget the Phantoms also flying who can intercept or mop up. It could also have assisted the Intruder on strike missions by loading it down with bombs in its natural attack role.

 

The Navy in Vietnam could have used a Carrier based F-111B.

 

If the Sea Vark would have held together in a carrier enviroment.

 

If they could get weight under-control.

 

Both Ifs were enough to kill it.

Edited October 19, 2008 by WarlordATF

[Stratos 3,191]

Will be amazing If someone can sort those hook problems so we all can try the embarked F111

[Lexx_Luthor 57]

Need a navalized F-12

 

I saw the video of U-2 carrier trials. I wonder what SR-71 carrier ops would look like. There was a Plan to use iceberg aircraft carriers in WW2. mmm

 

Somebody wanna 3Max an iceberg carrier?

[JediMaster 451]

LOL, SR-71 on a carrier. They don't make catapults strong enough to throw that plane fast enough to get into the air! The Blackbird had a very long takeoff and landing roll.

[+Typhoid 231]

 

"I wonder what SR-71 carrier ops would look like."

 

I can see it now!

 

"All hands on the Flight Deck prepare for recovery of SR-71N's and seek deep, deep shelter!!"

[Lexx_Luthor 57]

Typhoid::

"All hands on the Flight Deck prepare for recovery of SR-71N's and seek deep, deep shelter!!"

CIA operated in secret. The carrier crew was ordered below decks during A-12 carrier ops.

 

A-12 (and SR-71) leaked fuel when sitting, so the design was obviously intended for carrier use.

[JediMaster 451]

Of course, there was one way to do it. A carrier that could do 100kts.

[+streakeagle 871]

Carriers may not do 100+ knots, but they are much faster than the usual public figures of 33+ knots.

Nuclear carriers were required to be able to generate enough wind to launch aircraft no matter what the wind conditions.

The aircraft carriers are the fastest ships in the Navy counting the PHMs that did 55+ knots.

Submarine sonar techs estimate the speed at about 70 knots, at which point, the aircraft carrier is hydroplaning (bow out of the water) and making a bit of a rooster tail.

 

I have never seen such a thing, but during my service, I met people who had.

[Stratos 3,191]

Well 70 kts is very very fast mate, are you sure that a carrier can reach that speed??