Wikiposts
Search
Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

F-105

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 26th Dec 2006, 13:45
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Downeast
Age: 75
Posts: 18,302
Received 525 Likes on 220 Posts
To understand the fighting spirit of the Wild Weasels.....one might read this article about Thorsness and his back seater on a mission to Hanoi area.

http://www.afa.org/magazine/valor/0485valor_print.html
SASless is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2006, 16:08
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Royal Berkshire
Posts: 1,746
Received 79 Likes on 41 Posts
Originally Posted by SASless
The Bucc when compared to the Thud comes second by far.
Unless you wanted to operate off a carrier of course.......
GeeRam is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2006, 16:24
  #63 (permalink)  
mlc
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Midlands
Age: 55
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I've recently ordered 'Thud Ridge' and 'When thunder rolled', both covering the 105 in Vietnam. Looking forward to reading them.
mlc is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2006, 16:43
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: England
Posts: 488
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The Bucc when compared to the Thud comes second by far.
A very quick comparison of various aircraft can be done at the following site....
http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft_comparison.asp
That website is more like "Top Trumps" than reality. I suspect that they are getting range and radius confused for the Buccaneer. In "Top Trumps" a Tornado beats a Bucc, but in reality, apart from avionics....
As already mentioned Red Flag was born out of the Thud loss rates and proved to be an arena in which the Bucc performed spectacularly well, much to the surprise of the hosts. I guess they had been playing "Top Trumps"
Brain Potter is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2006, 16:53
  #65 (permalink)  
brickhistory
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Another good Weasel book that deals a lot with F-105s is "First In, Last Out: Tales of the Wild Weasels."

Lots of short (er) stories dealing with recollections of both missions and equipment.
 
Old 26th Dec 2006, 21:04
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Darn Sarth, UK
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thud mission audio

Wiki has some mission tapes and transcripts on some Thud wild weasel missions over Hanoi:

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Category:Vietnam_War

Pretty enlighting stuff!!!
rustybh is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2006, 09:40
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 887
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The photos in Posts 57 & 59 show just how much the F-105 benefitted from its protruding tailpipe. Remember how the Israeli Air Force added tailpipe extensions to some of its fighters (Mirages and A-4s, I think) so that any heatseekers that got 'up their chuff' exploded more or less in empty space without doing significant damage to the main workings of the aircraft.
Zoom is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2006, 12:15
  #68 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Lincs
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Smile

SASless,
Interesting site, but the adage 'Rubbish in, rubbish out' holds true.
The Bucc would happily exceed 561 knots and, indeed, I suspect that the 938 miles quoted as max range must be AT 561 kts, AT 100 ft and WITH at least 8 x 10000lb'ers (disregarding twin and triple store carriers and clearly exceeding the max 7 stores quoted).
That said, I would love to get my hands on a Thud - one cool ac, and I suspect that the Thud and the Bucc were of the same stable.
Captain Kirk is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2006, 12:22
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 571
Received 15 Likes on 7 Posts
F-105 v Bucc - low level range

Originally Posted by Captain Kirk
SASless,
........ I suspect that the 938 miles quoted as max range must be AT 561 kts, AT 100 ft and WITH at least 8 x 10000lb'ers (disregarding twin and triple store carriers and clearly exceeding the max 7 stores quoted).
Anybody any info on a typical low level range for the Thud? I'm tempted to think that the two-turbofans of the Bucc should give a greater range over the Thud's single turbojet...
Brewster Buffalo is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2006, 12:40
  #70 (permalink)  
Hardly Never Not Unwilling
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 481
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As I recall, the Thud could refuel on both the boom and basket.
BenThere is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2006, 13:59
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: No one's home...
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by BenThere
As I recall, the Thud could refuel on both the boom and basket.

You are correct although I never dragged a basket for any Thuds.. only RB and EB-66s.

We did refuel the Thuds awfully low.. we were in the "Fruit Bowl" (refueling anchors in Thailand were named Apple, Peach, Cherry, etc) and picked up some Thuds down around 14-16,000...but they were fast. As I remember, Thuds refueled at 315IAS.
wileydog3 is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2006, 22:33
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Axminster Devon
Age: 84
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Buccaneer v Thud

Graham Pitchfork's "The Buccaneers" seems to have no listing of performance or specs. However page 28 instances an unrefuelled flight from Goose Bay to Labrador of 1950 nm.

On the other hand, on the same page, a standard hi-lo-hi Beira patrol with refuelling seems to have extended to only 500 nm radius.
rlsbutler is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2006, 05:34
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Lincs
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Cool

Check out Song 3 here:
http://cdbaby.com/cd/dickjonas2
Captain Kirk is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2006, 08:10
  #74 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 81
Posts: 16,777
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by rlsbutler
Graham Pitchfork's "The Buccaneers" seems to have no listing of performance or specs. However page 28 instances an unrefuelled flight from Goose Bay to Labrador of 1950 nm.
On the other hand, on the same page, a standard hi-lo-hi Beira patrol with refuelling seems to have extended to only 500 nm radius.
Slip of the fingers me thinks. I think you meant LOSSIEMOUTH. The jet was fully fuelled and had a problem starting one engine. It taxied out and then had its tanks topped up by gravity feed IIRC.

OTOH the RN did a Hi-Lo-Hi attack on Gibraltar from the Ark while the Ark was in the south west approaches. Haven't worked out the distance and I am not sure if they used buddy-buddy refuelling.
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2006, 09:15
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Axminster Devon
Age: 84
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Pontius Nav - agreed Lossiemouth - oh dear, slip of the brain not the fingers.
rlsbutler is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.