MKSheppard

Last year, I went to the USAFM museum in Dayton, and spent about a week in their research division scanning in lots of stuff. I'm happy to report that finally, finally, I finished converting all my scans from that August 2008 trip; it only took me a year but I have an excuse! I kept getting distracted! Here's the Link Current specs are (lowballed of course) Rough Archive Size (As of 5 June 2009): 425 Standard Aircraft Characteristics (General file size of about 5-14~ MB) 354 Characteristics Sheets (General file size of about 2~ MB) 55 Airplane Characteristics and Performance Documents 32 Performance Data Documents 21 Standard Missile Characteristics For about 3,100~ pages, and 4~ GB scanned in and available for your pleasure. (this is a low ball estimate based on my knowledge of average document sizes) I already know from my website control panel that I've been found at the Mirage Factory's Private Forums. What were these? Well, they were kept in "Black Books", "Green Books" etc at military sites etc; as a way of quick reference for what something needed, how far it could generally fly with x ammunition etc -- a quick and easy reference that provided the information you needed for rough mission planning, while not taking up as much space as a flight manual for the aircraft. A lot of good information can also be found in them; to wit: One of the pages from the Skypirate's ACP; it shows where the fuel tanks are, the armor; and fields of fire for the defensive armament.

Ummm.....Go down to the April 7 Update: F-102A Delta Dagger SAC - 24 February 1958 F-102A Delta Dagger SAC - 2 November 1953 F-102A Delta Dagger SAC - August 1962 As for the F-102B/F-106A thing, I started looking through the documents, and there IS a sudden change in the F-102B; the April 1953 SAC for it shows the traditional forward-fuselage air intakes of teh F-102; and then when you go to the April 1956 SAC; it's like a totally different plane, with the mid-fuselage intake of the F-106. When I next update, I'll put a note in the F-102 section to that extent. F-106 documents are up there; just go to the April 7 update at the bottom of the page for: F-106A Delta Dart SAC - November 1964 F-106A Delta Dart SAC - October 1961 Eventually, there will be a F-106 section in the list; when I update enough times to reach the April 7 section (each time I update, I put the oldest update files in the sections -- this is intended to help people who don't visit my site super regularly remember what's new and what's not each time, instead of going through the huge list). Sorry if I'm hyjacking the thread a little. Carry on guys.

Or you could go HERE and download the following: F-102A Delta Dagger SAC - 24 February 1958 F-102A Delta Dagger SAC - 2 November 1953 F-102A Delta Dagger SAC - August 1962 TF-102A SAC - 7 March 1956 F-102B CS - 2 November 1953 F-102B CS - 25 April 1956 F-102B SAC - 2 November 1953 F-102B SAC - 25 April 1956 TF-102B CS - 18 March 1954 For all the loadout and FM model help you need; as well as the various Falcon missile sheets; specifically the XGAR ones: XGAR-1A Falcon SAC - 14 August 1953 XGAR-1A Falcon SAC - 15 November 1954 XGAR-1B Falcon SAC - 15 November 1954 XGAR-1C Falcon SAC - 2 May 1955 They're full of cool tidbits. Like for example this one from one of the XGAR papers:

which version? P-51D or P-51H?

I really have only one niggle with the F-111B as it is; it's missing the wet outboard pylons and is set up for air to air only; where the SAC shows a extra pair of outboard pylons and capability of a whole band of weapons:

Another author also made many of the same points, quite a while before Tommy Thomason: Illusions of Choice: The F-111 and the Problem of Weapons Acquisition Reform by Robert F. Coulam. He makes a lot of good points; including the one where the USN IIRC had a F-111B dogfight with a F-4 while laden down with it's full warload of Phoenix AAMs -- that's six tons (!) of missiles, while the F-14A got to dogfight with the F-4 with a mere 2.2~ tons of weapons (4 x Sparrows and 2 x Sidewinders)

I'd like to see: 1: Better avonics. Nothing totally detailed; just some simplistic radar bombing mode that makes all weather attacks with A-6s and F-111s possible; or high altitude bombing by A3D Skywarriors possibule. 2.) Configurable "best altitude" for each plane/campaign when you use ALT-N. As it is, you have to set a global parameter in the game right now, and what might be fine for low altitude eastern front fighting doesn't work for B-17 raids; or for 1950s high altitude bomber attacks.

MEMORANDUM FOR THE DEPUTY SECRETARY OF DEFENSE SUBJECT: (U) Weapon Systems Information 1. At the briefing on Monday, 13 July [1959], on selected Air Force Weapons and the Objective Force, you evidenced further interest in the Minuteman and F-108 Weapon Systems. The attached inclosures contain the information you requested. 2. In specific regard to the F-108, a core complete briefing has been prepared on the requirement for the system and status of its development. The briefing requires 45 minutes. This presentation can be scheduled for you at your convenience. THOMAS D. WHITE Chief of Staff 2 Incls 1. Justification for F-108/GAR-9 Weapon System 2. Minuteman Development Objectives Justification for F-108/GAR-9 Weapon System It has been stated repeatedly that too much of our defense budget has been programmed into what appears to be a fading threat, i.e., the manned bomber. The Air Force, in fact, has reduced its goals for manned interceptors drastically. Specifically, in 1957 we were planning on 5,200 fighter interceptors for 1963; in consecutive adjustments we have cut from this figure to 2,000 in 1963, with further reductions by 1970. For the foreseeable future, however, it appears that there will continue to be, in significant degree, a Soviet bomber threat against this nation. The projected capability of that threat is 65,000 feet altitude at speed of M 2.0 - 2.5. Accordingly, there will continue to be the requirement for a modern manned interceptor to perform those air defense operations beyond the capability of the air defense missile, and to provide flexibility which will allow us to concentrate fire power in areas where missiles have been expended. What is perhaps not clearly understood is that the F-108 represents a complete departure from contemporary aircraft design. It is constructed to cruise at 2000 MPH (to its full range). By new techniques we are able to make this high performance aircraft behave properly at lower speeds far safe takeoff and landing. Of special interest to you, I believe, is that the basic design of the F-108 permits its use as an offensive weapon as well as an exceptionally versatile defense fighter. In the offense role it can carry the recently developed family of small, high yield weapons, or modern reconnaissance devices. Its missile bay is equal in size to one of the two bomb bays in a B-47 bomber. Here we have additional application to the problem of limited war. The range and speed of the F-108 permits its deployment to Formosa, for example, in 4.3 hours. You will note there are no funds in our FY-60 program for contemporary interceptors. FY-59 bought out the last of the F-106 and F-101 series. We are placing dependence on the F-108 to meet the requirements for a multi-purpose fighter aircraft for the future. Our funding requested in our FY-60 program provide a for development of this aircraft as a long-range interceptor and air defense missile launcher. Its ability to cruise out or patrol far beyond fixed defenses and challenge marauders far from our borders is in consonance with the Air Force approach to air defense in depth. The advanced performance of the F-108 from both military and technical standpoints is also consistent with the vital need for the U. S. to maintain an optimum balance and effective relationship between offensive and defensive air capabilities. In short, the battle against Soviet nuclear offensive forces threatening the West, whether manned aircraft or missiles, should start in Soviet territory, not ours. In summary, it is the only really new fighter aircraft in the Air Force development program. Its growth to a truly global fighter capable of rapid deployment to fight or to fend off attack makes it, in my judgment, one of our most important new weapons.

F-108 was designed to cruise at Mach 3, just like the B-70. Otherwise, it would have been useless as a escort fighter.

From a Yefim Gordon book published by Midland on the MiG-25 recon detachment sent to Egypt: The cases where NATO thought Mach 3+ MiG-25s were streaking over Europe to ditch in the North Atlantic were in fact expendable Tu-123 drones which overflew europe.

Gonna be mighty hard to catch a B-70A doing Mach 3.1~ at 85,000 feet. Yes, the production B-70A was to have a lot higher ceiling than the XB-70

MOAR! Also, do the B-70s have DAMS; with on board AIM-47 Falcons to shoot down incoming fighters?

Now now, guys, don't expect speedy progress; since I'm not a very crack 3D Modeller; and I haven't really done any animation yet until now; but here's the results of a few hours of banging around: Basically, this is Douglas' entry to the B-29 requirements -- it's even bigger than the B-29, and a later redesign had it emerging with R-4360s

Actually, I read a book once that made the case that the Navy unfairly handicapped the F-111B. Sure, it was no F-8 Crusader in dogfighting, but neither was the F-4 or F-14A. It also pointed out that the F-14A suffered from cost and weight growth issues to the same extent that the F-111B did; and was handicapped by engine problems -- like the F-111B. It also pointed out the fact that the Navy played tricks with the loadouts for the F-111 and F-14 in ACM; the F-111 was expected to do ACM with a warload of at least four Phoenixes; that results in about 4,000 lbs of weight; versus four sparrows and two winders on the F-14; bout 2,400 lbs of weight. In the end, the Navy killed the F-111B because they really really hated the fact that McNamara had forced it on them from outside their regular procurement channels.

Found some more information on the project in my files:

It started out as a sort of indepenent project by the manufacturer I think to compete with AMSA specifications, and it sort of gained traction when the B-1A program collapsed -- the commander of SAC actually did support it -- I think his thinking was: "This will get me a plane that will be 2x better than a FB-111A, and capable of at LEAST some shallow penetration of Soviet Russia; but when it comes time to buy a new manned heavy bomber (like B-2), it won't compete for funding since it's in a totally different weight class."

You guys all forgot the ULTIMATE VARK: FB-111H! By Comparison: FB-111A: 2 x Turbofans, 12,500 lb dry, 20,350 lbs with afterburner. 1,453 MPH @ 50,000 feet max speed clean 1,320 MPH @ 36,000 feet max speed clean 838 MPH @ Sea Level Max speed clean 50,263 ft service ceiling 2,500 mile range with four SRAMs and internal fuel. 2 x SRAM internal bay. FB-111H: 2 x F101 Turbofans; 17,000 lb dry, 30,000 lb with afterburner. 1,055 MPH @ 36,000 feet maximum speed 650 MPH @ 200 Feet maximum speed 5 x SRAM Internal bay (one source) or 12 x SRAM Internal Bay (one source)

F-111B! Hey, If you need additional help to do the F-111B; I suggest you consult it's standard aircraft characteristics sheet SAC Depository on my website Link to SAC for F-111B in PDF form

F-111B! Hey, If you need additional help to do the F-111B; I suggest you consult it's standard aircraft characteristics sheet SAC Depository on my website Link to PDF

So when do we get to burn through enemy defenses at Mach 3.0 at 85,000 feet? BTW:

Book is "Valkyrie: North American's Mach 3 Superbomber" and yes it's still available

Reduction. As for IR Signature. Not as big as you might think: From a book on the B-70:

Where......did you get that B-36 Peacemaker? Six Turning Four Burning? I WANT IT!!!

Okay guys; here's the information on the planned PRODUCTION model B-70A Valkyrie for the mod that's been in the works for a while.... See; there were to be three aircraft built originally for the program, plus production models. Air Vehicle #1; which became the XB-70A. Air Vehicle #2; which became the XB-70B. Air Vehicle #3; which was to be the YB-70, and would carry a sort of early bomb nav system and have a four man crew -- basically to test out the early prototypes of the radar etc and to do bomb drop tests. However, A/V 3 was cancelled, and errors in the construction of air vehicle #1, caused one of the fuel tanks to be permanently sealed off (it leaked like crazy); and a speed/altitude limit to be imposed (due to it using early production honeycomb skin); meaning it was restricted from sustained Mach 3 flight (it could hit it for short bursts), due to skin problems. A/V #2, being built later in the program, benefited from the mistakes made in A/V #1's construction, and was significantly better performing due to the problems with the stainless steel honeycomb construction being corrected. It proved that the B-70 as designed could cruise indefinitely at Mach 3 as long as it had fuel by doing a 30 minute flight at Mach 3 (which was when the engineers calculated maximum skin expansion and heating would occur). However, before we could fully explore the envelope of Mach 3 flight, A/V #2 was lost in a mid-air collision. A/V#1 went on to do some research for NASA before being flown to the USAF Museum. So. Enough talking. Here's the Statistics for the XB-70A, which you see most commonly quoted (the specs are from Baugher). Maximum speed 1982 mph at 75,550 feet, 1254 mph at 35,000 feet. Landing speed 184 mph. Service ceiling 75, 500 feet. Initial climb rate 27,450 feet per minute. Combat range 3419 miles, maximum range 4290 miles. Dimensions: Wingspan 105 feet, Length 196 feet 6 inches, Height 30 feet 8 inches, wing area 6297.15 square feet. Weights: Empty weight 231,215 pounds, 521,056 pounds gross weight, 534,792 pounds maximum. You can compare them with the B-70A model shown here. EDIT: By the way, don't be disturbed by the 10,000 lb load for the "Design mission". That's a common "special weapons" load for nuclear armed aircraft; the B-52's "design mission load" is also 10,000 lbs.

that WoE had, allowing you to import WoV or SFP campaigns and aircraft if you had it on your hard drive?